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 September 12, 2017, at around 16:00, the Plaintiff driven a B 9-car while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.175% at the blind distance from the 119 Sinsan Elementary School in Gyeyang-gu Incheon Gyeyang-ro.

B. On December 22, 2017, the Defendant issued a notice of revocation of the Class II ordinary vehicle driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on December 22, 2017, on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.1%.

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 March 13, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1, 5 or 11, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is an employee in charge of delivery in a food selling company. Considering the Plaintiff’s circumstances and various circumstances, such as making it difficult to maintain his/her livelihood due to the disposition of the instant case, the instant disposition is unlawful as it excessively harsh and excessively deviates from discretion.

B. Determination 1 as to whether a punitive administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretionary power ought to be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to such disposition by objectively examining the content of the offense committed as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the relevant circumstances.

In this case, even if the criteria for punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the administrative agency's internal rules for administrative affairs, and thus, it is not effective externally to guarantee citizens or courts. Whether such disposition is legitimate or not should be determined in accordance with the contents and purport of the relevant laws and regulations, not only the above criteria for disposition