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 July 18, 2018, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol at around 22:25, was under the influence of alcohol, controlled a police official while driving a C-rolling stock on the front side of Heung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B. On the same day, the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol concentration was measured at 0.150% as a result of the respiratory measurement conducted around 2:31 on the same day.

B. On July 18, 2018, at around 22:45, the Plaintiff measured the blood alcohol level by collecting blood from the blood level in the D Emergency room at D Hospital. As a result of the appraisal, the Plaintiff’s blood alcohol level was measured at 0.151%.

C. On August 8, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s first-class ordinary driving license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Article 93(1)1 of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 15530, Mar. 27, 2018) on the ground that the Plaintiff was driven in the state of alcohol level of 0.151% in blood alcohol level.

On August 13, 2018, the Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the said request on October 10, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 9, Eul evidence 1 through 4, Eul evidence 7 through 9, Eul evidence 11 through 16, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant disposition

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Repulmonary and blood measurement with respect to the Plaintiff was conducted at the time of increase in the blood alcohol level, and in particular, blood measurement was conducted using the species of alcohol for disinfection that the nurse at D hospital was in an emergency room. As such, the Plaintiff’s Repulmonary and blood measurement result with respect to the Plaintiff cannot be trusted. Therefore, the instant disposition based on the aforementioned erroneous Repulmonary and blood measurement result is unlawful. 2) The Plaintiff’s assertion of abuse of discretionary power is an abuse of discretion.