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 21, 1978, the Plaintiff: (a) obtained a Class I ordinary driver’s license on June 27, 1983; and (b) obtained a Class I driver’s license on June 27, 1983; (c) on January 22, 2016, the Plaintiff driven BM5 motor vehicles under the influence of alcohol at around 0.062% of alcohol level; (d) while driving the BM5 motor vehicle in the influence of alcohol level on January 22, 2016, and driving the road in the south-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Southern-gu, in the direction of the coast at the jurisdiction of Jak-gu, Jin-gun; (e) granted a traffic accident that causes a shock of the motor vehicle directly facing the signal due to an occupational negligence during which he/she violated the signal while driving the motor vehicle in the direction of the coast; and (e)

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). (b)

On February 18, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke a large driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff with respect to drunk driving and traffic accidents as stated in the preceding paragraph.

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal, but was dismissed on April 5, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 8, Eul evidence 1 to 12 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The legality of the instant disposition

가. 원고의 주장 원고가 37년 동안 직업으로 운전업무에 종사하면서 음주운전 전력이 전혀 없었던 점, 전날 저녁 음주 후 충분한 수면을 취하고 일어났기 때문에 술이 깼을 것이라 생각하고 운전에 이른 점, 음주수치와 상해의 정도가 경미한 점, 화물차를 운전하는 직업상 운전을 하지 못하면 당장 가족의 생계가 막연한 실정이고 많은 부채로 파산에 이를 수 있는 점, 깊이 반성하고 있고 다시는 음주운전을 하지 않겠다고 다짐하고 있는 점 등 제반 정상을 고려하여 보면, 이 사건 처분은 재량권을 일탈ㆍ남용한 것으로서 위법하다.

B. (1) Determination is based on whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms.