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 July 25, 2018, at around 05:39, the Plaintiff driven a car B Pote while under the influence of alcohol at 0.147% (blood collection appraisal) and 100 meters from the front of the river basin in Busan City to the front of C at the same time.

B. On August 25, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.1%, which is the criteria for revoking the license.

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on October 17, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion does not cause any personal or material injury due to the Plaintiff’s drunk driving, the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the driver’s license that caused a traffic accident or has no record of driving under the influence of alcohol for about eight years, and the Plaintiff is going against and is going not to drive under the influence of alcohol again. The Plaintiff is a medical care social worker working at the Medical Care Center, and the Plaintiff is required to gather the elderly and take care of the hospital, purchase of goods for the medical care center, visit the National Health Insurance Corporation, etc. In light of the fact that the license is revoked, the instant disposition is in a situation where it is impossible to perform its duties and it is necessary to retire from work, and thus, should be revoked.

B. Determination 1 whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms or not is the degree of infringement of public interest by objectively examining the content of the violation as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all relevant circumstances.