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 May 22, 2020, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol at 0.08% of alcohol level on May 22, 2020, driven a 200-meter 100m level from the roads front of the E Office located in D, Ansi-si, Ansi-si, Ansi-si, Seoul-si, on the roads leading to the mutual incompetence.

B. On June 9, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license 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 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

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 August 28, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1 to 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion that human and physical damage did not occur due to the Plaintiff’s drinking driving, and the distance of driving is relatively short, the Plaintiff’s self-driving is going against and again, and the Plaintiff is expected not to drive under the influence of alcohol, and the Plaintiff needs to move his/her body every day to the field located in Gyeonggi-do and Seoul as an employee in the construction business, and the cancellation of the driver’s license needs to take into account the fact that it is impossible to perform his/her duties, and that the Plaintiff is obliged to support his/her spouse and to repay his/her liability, the instant disposition should be revoked as it is in violation of the law of abuse of discretionary authority due to excessive restriction on the Plaintiff.

B. Determination 1 whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms or not is the degree of infringement of public interest by objectively examining the content of the violation as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all relevant circumstances.