1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On November 8, 2015, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition that the Plaintiff revoked the Plaintiff’s Class 1 ordinary car (license number: C) as of January 20, 2016, by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff driven BM5 taxi at a point 102.3km in the direction of the 102.3km in Seoul, the outer cycle Highway, where the gold movement was located at a time of Heging, while under the influence of alcohol by 00:5 on November 8, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] No dispute, entry of evidence of Nos. 4 through 8, the whole purport of pleading

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion has a group of students of the same elementary school in Chungcheongnam-nam, and the plaintiff spawn spawn spawn spawn spawn spawn spawn spawn spawn spawn spawn spawn spawn spawn after about five hours passed from that spawn spawn spawn spawn, which is a procedural problem, and there is also a question about the accuracy of drinking water spawn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn swn

B. Even if the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking driving is an administrative agency's discretionary act, in light of today's mass means of transportation and the situation where a driver's license is issued in large quantities, the increase of traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, and the seriousness of the result, etc., the need for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving should be emphasized more, and the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking driving on the ground of revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking