The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

On April 17, 2020: (a) around 22:18, 2020, the Plaintiff driven C rocketing car volume with 0.154% alcohol level at the front of Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on the roads.

(2) On April 30, 2020, the Defendant revoked the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 common and class 2 common) on the ground of the instant drunk driving.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on May 13, 2020, but was dismissed on June 30, 2020.

[Grounds for recognition] In light of the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the traffic accident did not occur due to the plaintiff's assertion as to the legitimacy of the disposition in this case, and the distance of drinking driving in this case is only 4 km, the plaintiff's vehicle driver's license is essential for counseling, and driving is an important means to maintain family's livelihood, and the disposition in this case faces economic difficulties, etc., the disposition in this case is unlawful as it deviates from and abused the scope of discretionary power.

Judgment

Today, in light of the fact that a rapid increase in automobiles and a large number of driver's licenses are issued in traffic days, the need to strictly observe traffic regulations is growing, and the traffic accidents caused by the driving of a motor vehicle are frequently frequent and there are many cases where the results are harsh, so it is necessary to strictly regulate driving of a motor vehicle, it is more necessary to realize public interest rather than disadvantages suffered by a driver who does not cause a traffic accident due to the revocation disposition of the license for the driving of a motor vehicle (see Supreme Court Decision 96Nu10812, Oct. 11, 1996). The whole purport of the arguments can be acknowledged by taking into account the aforementioned evidence.