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 May 3, 2018, at around 20:33, the Plaintiff was found to have driven B vehicles while driving them under the influence of 0.092% at the front of the police box located in the front of the police box located in the Chungcheongnam-do, Ulsan-si.

(hereinafter referred to as “drinking driving of this case”). (b)

On May 15, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class 1 common use) as of June 19, 2018 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Articles 93(1)2 and 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, Article 91(1) [Attachment 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff had two or more times of drinking alcohol (0.089% of blood alcohol level on March 18, 2001; 0.058% of blood alcohol level on April 23, 2006; 0.074% of blood alcohol level on February 23, 2011).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on July 17, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 9, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Considering that the Plaintiff’s assertion was made several times, but the Plaintiff did not have reached 0.100% of the traffic accident or blood alcohol level, which is the criteria for revocation of the license, and that the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is necessarily necessary because the Plaintiff was carrying the salted fish on the cargo and selling it in five days, it was unlawful since the instant disposition was excessively harsh to the Plaintiff, thereby deviating from and abusing the discretion.

B. According to the proviso of Article 93(1) of the Road Traffic Act and Article 93(1)2 of the same Act, where a person who has driven at least twice a drunk driving again constitutes grounds for the suspension of a driver’s license, the competent Commissioner of the Local Police Agency must revoke the driver’s license. Thus, the instant disposition is a binding act with no room for discretion.

Therefore, the plaintiff.