The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

A. On March 12, 2020, at around 00:52, the Plaintiff driven B-car under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.09% prior to the intersection of the Han-U.S. medicine at the Hansung City (hereinafter “instant drinking”).

B. On March 30, 2020, the Defendant rendered a decision to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class II ordinary) as of April 24, 2020 pursuant to Articles 93(1)1 and 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act against the Plaintiff on the ground of the instant drunk driving.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

The Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on June 23, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 5 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the circumstances such as the Plaintiff’s assertion that this case’s drinking driving did not cause damage, and the distance of driving is short, and the Plaintiff’s use of a driving by proxy in the ordinary place of business, the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is absolutely necessary due to a large number of self-employed persons, and the Plaintiff’s family members who support and are economically difficult, and thus, the Plaintiff’s disadvantage infringed compared to the public interest protected by the instant disposition is significantly excessive, and thus, the instant disposition is unlawful by abusing and abusing its discretion

B. The revocation of a driver's license when a person who has obtained one driver's license is driving under the influence of alcohol is an administrative agency's discretionary act. However, in light of the increase of traffic accidents caused by driving under the influence of alcohol and the suspicion of its result, the necessity of public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by driving under the influence of alcohol should be more serious. The revocation of a driver's license should be prevented rather than the disadvantage of the party who will suffer from the revocation of the license, unlike the revocation of the general beneficial administrative act.