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 20, 2019, the Plaintiff driven B vehicles while under the influence of alcohol with 0.115% alcohol level around 04:50.

B. On August 29, 2019, by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act, the Defendant issued a notice of decision to revoke the driver’s license (class 1 common) to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on October 29, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 12 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. Considering the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s alleged mobile distance is relatively short of 3km; (b) there was no damage caused by the instant drunk driving; (c) the confession; and (d) the Plaintiff actively cooperates with the detection of the suspected items; (b) the Plaintiff’s driver’s license of electrical engineers at construction sites is absolutely necessary; (c) the maintenance of livelihood; (d) the parents’ economic difficulties arise when the driver’s license is revoked; and (e) the Plaintiff provided community service, such as delivery of usual support payments; and (e) receiving an official commendation for a no-disaster movement, etc., the instant disposition is deemed unlawful by abusing its discretionary authority

B. In light of the fact that one motor vehicle is a mass means of transportation and accordingly, the need to strictly observe traffic regulations is greater as the traffic situation is congested as the driver's license is issued in large volume, and the traffic accidents caused by drinking driving are frequently frequent and the results are harsh, so it is necessary to strictly regulate driving to protect the majority of drivers and pedestrians, the need for public interest in preventing traffic accidents caused by drinking driving should be more serious, and the revocation of driver's license is common sense.