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 April 17, 2018, the Defendant issued a revocation disposition for a driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.129% at the blood alcohol level on March 24, 2019, driven a B car under the influence of alcohol level of 0.129% on the street in mass production at the time of mass production.”

B. On May 7, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission. However, a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim was rendered on June 27, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 4 through 7, 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. In light of the fact that the plaintiff's substitute driver's license was driven by 3 meters while waiting for the plaintiff's substitute driver's license, the instant disposition constitutes deviation or abuse of discretionary authority.

B. (1) Determination is that the public interest needs to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, because of frequent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving today's frequent and severe results, and the revocation of driver's license on the ground of drinking driving is more severe than the case of general beneficial administrative acts, unlike the case of general beneficial administrative acts, the general preventive aspect that should prevent drinking driving rather than the disadvantage of the party due to the revocation should be emphasized. The Plaintiff's driving level constitutes the criteria for revocation of driver's license under Article 91 (1) [Attachment Table 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, with the degree of the Plaintiff's driving level 0.129% of blood alcohol concentration.

(2) In addition, considering the inevitable circumstances in which the Plaintiff had no choice but to drive under the influence of alcohol, blood alcohol concentration, influence of drunk driving, and revocation of driver’s license, it is possible to obtain a license again after the lapse of a certain period. Therefore, considering the circumstances asserted by the Plaintiff, the instant disposition is proportional, even if it is considered that the effect of sanctions is limited to a limited period, occupation, and economic situation, etc.