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 February 7, 2015, at around 00:09, the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with 0.10% of blood alcohol concentration, and was found to have been exposed to the police’s drinking control while driving a C low-est car owned by the Plaintiff on the front side of Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B.

B. On February 24, 2015, the Defendant: (a) applied Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act to the Plaintiff on the ground of the foregoing drunk driving; (b) issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s first-class ordinary driver’s license as of March 22, 2015 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal on March 10, 2015, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on April 7, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, 10 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On October 28, 199, the Plaintiff asserted that he had no record of driving under the influence of alcohol for 16 years after the Plaintiff acquired a Class 1 ordinary driving license on October 28, 199, and the Plaintiff used it as an agent for driving under the influence of alcohol. On February 6, 2015, the disposition of this case without considering the Plaintiff’s circumstances such as the fact that the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol content is 0.10%, which is the minimum standard for the revocation of the Plaintiff’s license, and the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol content is higher than that of the Plaintiff’s license, and the Plaintiff’s occupation as a distribution team member is absolutely necessary for driving under the Plaintiff’s own awareness, and the Plaintiff’s revocation of the driver’s license is an unlawful disposition that deviates from and abused the discretionary authority without considering the Plaintiff’s circumstances such as the fact that the Plaintiff’s license was revoked.

B. Even if the revocation of the driver's license on the ground of drinking driving is an administrative agency's discretionary act, today's motor vehicle is a popular means of transportation, and accordingly, a driver's license for motor vehicles is large.