1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 22, 2019, at around 04:58, the Plaintiff driven 100 meters in the vicinity of the shooting distance in front of the D Middle School located in C when interesting at Si, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.161% of alcohol level.

B. On September 11, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.08%, which is the criteria for revoking the license.

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on November 19, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 9, 10 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff was a substitute engineer after drinking alcohol, but the substitute engineer was forced to drive a vehicle on a road 300 to 400 meters away from the apartment site in which the Plaintiff lives, and the vehicle was inevitably driven to prevent interference with road traffic. The Plaintiff’s 25 years after obtaining the Plaintiff’s driver’s license, and there was no power to drive a drunk or cause a traffic accident, and the Plaintiff driven a short distance and did not cause secondary damage, such as traffic accidents. The Plaintiff, as an architect, operates a mixed office. The Plaintiff is operating a mixed office as a certified architect. Considering the characteristics of the Plaintiff’s business, it is difficult to operate a business due to an excessive cost expenditure if the Plaintiff is unable to drive a vehicle, and the Plaintiff is obliged to support his spouse and two children, the instant disposition in this case should be revoked because it constitutes an unlawful act of abusing discretion by excessively harshing the Plaintiff.

B. The issue of whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms is the ground for the disposition.