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 May 13, 2017, at around 10:25, the Plaintiff driven D vehicles under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.072% on the front of the road located in Busan Seo-gu B, Busan.

(hereinafter referred to as “drinking driving of this case”). (b)

The defendant has previously been driven and discovered on two occasions ( January 11, 2007, September 1, 2009) in a state of alcohol level of at least 0.05%.

C. On May 19, 2017, the Defendant: (a) issued a disposition revoking the license pursuant to Article 93(1)2 of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff is a person who had had a two-time drinking driving record but was engaged in a three-time drinking driving; (b) on the ground that the Plaintiff was a person who had a three-time drinking driving.

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on August 22, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 1, 2, 3 evidence, Eul's 1 to 4 (including provisional lot number application), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was unlawful in light of the following circumstances: (a) the Plaintiff did not cause any traffic accident due to drinking alcohol; (b) the revocation of the Plaintiff’s driver’s license would seriously interfere with his duties and livelihood; (c) the developments leading to driving; and (d) the attitude toward the investigation agency; and (d) the degree of blood alcohol concentration.

B. According to the proviso of Article 93(1) of the Road Traffic Act and Article 93(2) of the same Act, when a person who has driven not less than twice a drunk driving again falls under the grounds for the suspension of a driver’s license, the driver’s license shall be revoked as necessary. Thus, it is obvious that the disposition agency has no discretion to choose whether to revoke the license, and therefore, the disposition of revocation of the driver’s license is subject to the requirements of the same Act.