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 June 24, 2020, the Plaintiff driven a DNA siren car with a maximum alcohol content of 0.083% in blood, while under the influence of alcohol at the front of the Gyeyang-gu C alcohol house located in Gyeyang-gu B at the time of high height around 20:30 on June 24, 2020.

B. On July 7, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s Class 1 ordinary and Class 2 ordinary driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff was driven while under the influence of alcohol more than 0.08% in blood, which is the base value for revocation of 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 administrative appeal on October 13, 2020.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is short of the driving distance for drinking, the fact that the Plaintiff has been engaged in exemplary driving in addition to only one minor accident for a long time, has been actively cooperating in the investigation and investigation of this case, the fact that the Plaintiff actively cooperates in the investigation and investigation of this case, and is currently against and again not driving under the influence of drinking.

In light of the fact that the driver's license is revoked when the driver's license is necessarily required due to the Plaintiff's occupation (real estate related company members), it is difficult for the Plaintiff's home to maintain the livelihood. In light of the fact that the instant disposition is too harsh to the Plaintiff, and thus, it should be revoked.

B. 1) Determination of whether the relevant legal doctrine or punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion ought to be made by objectively examining the content and degree of the offense of inducement of the disposition, the necessity of public interest to be achieved by the disposition, the disadvantage to be borne by the individual, and all relevant circumstances, etc., and comparing and determining the degree of infringement of public interest and the disadvantage to be borne by the individual due to the disposition.