1. On August 19, 2013, the Defendant’s revocation of the driver’s license (Class 1 large, Class 1 ordinary) against the Plaintiff on August 19, 2013.

1. On August 19, 2013, the Defendant issued the instant disposition against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class 1 large and Class 1 ordinary) was revoked as of September 15, 201, on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol on August 23, 2001; (b) the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol at 0.065% on December 4, 2008, and was under the influence of alcohol at 0.065% on two occasions; and (c) the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol at 0.050% on July 30, 2013 and was under the influence of alcohol on three occasions.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff asserts that the disposition of this case is unlawful for the following reasons.

(1) The Plaintiff’s blood alcohol concentration measured by the pulmonary measurement method at the time of the crackdown is merely 0.050%. This is a result measured after the Plaintiff completed drinking and 20 to 30 minutes after the Plaintiff’s completion of drinking, and it is highly likely that the result of measurement is uncertain, or that the blood alcohol concentration at the time of actual driving was lower than that of the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of actual driving, and thus, it cannot be readily concluded that the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving was above 0.05%, which is the punishment standard for punishment. Accordingly, the instant disposition is unlawful.

(2) The Plaintiff is the most supported by wife and children, and the driver’s license is essential to maintain the livelihood of family members because the captain and the employees in charge of the BP accounting office are frequently engaged in the external business.

In addition, in light of various circumstances, such as the fact that the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol concentration is low at the time of regulating the instant case, and the driving distance was very short, the instant disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license was in violation of the principle of proportionality, thereby deviating from and abusing the bounds of discretion.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

(c).