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 August 29, 2014, the Plaintiff driven B vehicles while under the influence of alcohol with 0.116% alcohol concentration at around 21:20.

B. Accordingly, on September 19, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the first-class ordinary license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff.

C. The Plaintiff underwent the pre-trial procedure.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, Eul Nos. 1 through 13 (including partial defense numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff operated the mechanical manufacturing business, and thus, the Plaintiff’s disposition of this case constitutes a case where the Plaintiff’s discretionary authority was abused and abused, and thus, constitutes a case where the Defendant’s disposition of this case constitutes a case where the Plaintiff’s discretionary authority was abused and abused. In light of the following circumstances: (a) the driver’s license was required for the living of the Plaintiff and his family; (b) the blood alcohol level was relatively high; and (c) the blood alcohol level was not relatively high.

B. 1) In light of the fact that the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking is an administrative agency's discretionary act, today's mass means of transportation, and accordingly, the increase in traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, and the result thereof are frequently involved, etc., the necessity for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving is very large (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Nu13214, Nov. 14, 1997). Therefore, when the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking driving on the ground of drinking driving, the general preventive aspect should be emphasized, unlike the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking driving, rather than the disadvantage of the party to be suffered by the revocation, should be emphasized. 2) In light of the above legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence mentioned above, namely, ①.