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 June 10, 2017, at around 07:02, the Plaintiff driven CKaN vehicle under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.136% on the front side of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant drinking”).

B. On June 21, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class I ordinary) on the ground of the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on July 4, 2017, but was dismissed on August 22, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1, 14 evidence, Eul 5 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) although the Plaintiff was a representative engineer, the Plaintiff had been forced to drive for a long time due to the lack of a representative engineer; (b) there was no personal injury due to driving of the instant drinking; and (c) the Plaintiff’s occupation (business and supply as a representative of small and medium enterprises) requires driving of the vehicle; and (d) the instant disposition is anticipated to cause the Plaintiff and his family’s livelihood difficult when the instant disposition became final and conclusive; and (e) the instant disposition is deemed to have exceeded the scope of discretion or abused discretionary power.

B. Determination 1 as to whether an administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretion 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 ground for disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all relevant circumstances.

In such cases, 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.