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 16, 2015, at around 00:35, the Plaintiff driven a motor vehicle for Costasch Rexroth on the front side of the members of Ansan-si, Ansan-si, under the influence of alcohol by 0.128%.

B. On August 31, 2015, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s first-class ordinary driver’s license (license number: D) on September 26, 2015 by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act to the Plaintiff on the ground of the foregoing drunk driving.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 through 14 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is unlawful as it deviatess from and abused discretion, taking into account various circumstances, including the fact that the Plaintiff’s occupational driver’s license is essential due to the relationship with which the Plaintiff works for the human resources dispatched business, and that the Plaintiff was driving in compliance with traffic regulations for 9 years after re-acquisition of a driver’s license in 2006.

B. Even if the revocation of the driver's license on the ground of drinking driving is an administrative agency's discretionary action, in light of today's mass means of transportation and the situation where the driver's license is issued in large quantities, the increase of traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, the suspicion of its result, etc., the need for public interest should be emphasized to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, and when the driver's license is revoked on the ground of drinking driving on the ground of the revocation of the driver's license on the ground of drinking driving on the ground of the revocation of the ordinary beneficial administrative action, it should be emphasized that the ordinary preventive aspect should be prevented rather than the disadvantage

In light of the above legal principles, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the foregoing evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings, the need for public interest to achieve the disposition of this case, even if the Plaintiff claims, is considered.