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 November 7, 2019, at around 00:10, the Plaintiff driven C vehicle while under the influence of alcohol 0.130% in front of Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu (hereinafter “instant drinking”).

B. On November 20, 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 large and class 1 common) on the ground of the instant drunk driving (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 February 18, 2020.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap’s 1 through 3, 6, Eul’s 1, 2, and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. In light of all circumstances, the Plaintiff’s assertion actively cooperated in the investigation of drunk driving after the pertinent drunk driving, 12 years of accident experience, 3 km of drinking driving distance, 3km of working distance, the Plaintiff engaged in fire-fighting technology and experienced economic difficulties, and there are family members to support, etc., the instant disposition is beyond the scope of discretion or abuse of discretionary authority.

B. Determination 1 as to whether a punitive administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretionary power ought to be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to such disposition by objectively examining the content of the offense committed as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all relevant circumstances.

In this case, even if the criteria for punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the administrative agency's internal rules for administrative affairs, and it is not effective externally to guarantee citizens or courts, and whether the pertinent disposition is legitimate or not.