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 March 26, 2020, at around 01:39, the Plaintiff driven B vehicles under the influence of alcohol level of 0.083% in the direction of the side of the side of the side of Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, and was discovered to police officers.

B. On April 6, 2020, the Defendant rendered a decision to revoke the first-class ordinary license by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff was driving under influence of alcohol as above.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

On April 21, 2020, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on June 23, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. In light of the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff is holding office as a company’s execution engineer, the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is necessarily required, and the Plaintiff’s difficult home-type and economic circumstances, the instant disposition was excessively harsh to the Plaintiff, thereby exceeding the discretion of the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks revocation of the instant disposition.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

C. 1) Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion under the social norms should be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual by objectively examining the content of the act of violation, which is the reason for the disposition, and the public interest to be achieved by the relevant act of disposal, as well as all relevant circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Du11779, Apr. 7, 2000; 2000Du11779, etc.; where the Presidential Decree or Ordinance of the Ministry provides the disposition standards, the disposition standards per itself do not conform to the Constitution or the relevant Act; or, in light of the content and purport of the relevant Act and subordinate statutes,