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 5, 2020, at around 23:24, the Plaintiff driven a knife vehicle in the Ireland, while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.134% from the parking lot of the C Middle School located in Pyeongtaek-si B to the front day of his/her mouth.

B. On February 5, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the driver’s license for Class I ordinary and Class II motor vehicles (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff 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 base value for revocation of 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 June 9, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 17, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that human and material damage caused by the Plaintiff’s driving under the influence of alcohol does not occur, the driving distance is short of 15 meters, the Plaintiff has been driving without compliance for about 28 years since the Plaintiff acquired the Plaintiff’s license, has used it as a usual proxy driving, there has been no accident, such as traffic accident or drinking driving, etc., active cooperation in the investigation and investigation of this case after the acquisition of the driver’s license, the fact that the Plaintiff actively cooperates with the investigation and investigation of this case, currently is going against and again is going not to drive under the influence of alcohol, and the Plaintiff’s volunteer activities, such as blood donation, etc., are committed, and if the driver’s license is revoked due to the nature of the Plaintiff’s business, it is difficult for the Plaintiff’s home to maintain its livelihood. Therefore, the disposition of this case should be revoked because it is so excessive that

B. Whether the relevant legal doctrine 1-related administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretionary power, is to be achieved by the content and degree of the violation, which is the reason for the disposition, and the disposition.