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 January 21, 2020, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol at around 23:14, operated a section of approximately 200 meters from the street in the vicinity of the Incheon Bupyeong-gu Seoul to the front street in the Incheon Bupyeong-gu D apartment.

B. On January 22, 2008, the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition suspending driver's license on the ground that he/she was driven under the influence of alcohol level 0.071%.

C. On February 7, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the first and second ordinary drivers’ licenses of the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 93(1)2 of the Road Traffic Act on February 7, 2020, on the ground that the Plaintiff was making a drinking twice or more (hereinafter “instant disposition”). D.

On February 26, 2020, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition. However, the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on March 31, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant disposition should be determined by comparing and balancing the public interest and private interest of the punitive administrative disposition; that there was no personal and material damage; that is a relatively short moving distance; that is, the use of ordinary driving by proxy; that was actively cooperated with an investigation agency; that is, the possibility and risk of criticism is considerably low; that is, the degree of infringement of private interest caused by the cancellation of a driver’s license is excessive; that is, the building culture is awarded; that the Plaintiff is granted; that the Plaintiff operates the E architectural office; that is, the Plaintiff is operating the E architectural office; that the Plaintiff is in need of vehicle operation by performing the design work of multi-household and multi-household housing housing; that is, the Plaintiff’s main task is impossible to perform his/her duties if the license is revoked; that is, the Plaintiff is a driver’s license.