1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. On August 28, 2015, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition with respect to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff driven B cargo vehicles under the influence of alcohol content of 0.141% at the front of the Yancheon-gu, Yancheon-gu, Yancheon-gu, Yancheon-gu, Yancheon-si, on July 31, 2015, on the ground that: (a) the Plaintiff driven B cargo vehicles under the influence of alcohol content of 0.141%; (b) the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class 1 common common) was revoked as of September 23

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is currently operating a bicycle agency while working in a construction company. Considering all circumstances such as the need for driving in order to transport construction materials, etc. and deliver bicycles, and when the driver’s license is revoked, the instant disposition constitutes a case where the Plaintiff excessively harshly abused or abused discretion.

B. In today’s determination, the need to strictly observe traffic regulations due to the rapid increase of automobiles, the large number of driver’s licenses is growing, and the traffic accidents caused by drunk driving are frequently frequently and the results are harsh, so it is very important for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drunk driving. Therefore, the revocation of driver’s licenses on the ground of drunk driving should be emphasized more than the disadvantage of the party who will suffer from the revocation, unlike the cancellation of the ordinary beneficial administrative act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Du17021, Dec. 27, 2007). The Plaintiff does not seem to have any inevitable circumstance that the Plaintiff could not avoid drinking driving at the time of regulating, and the Plaintiff is already able to avoid drinking driving on three occasions prior to the instant drunk driving.