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 February 7, 1981, the Plaintiff acquired a Class 1 ordinary driver’s license (B). On April 19, 2010, the Plaintiff was subject to the suspension of the driver’s license by driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of 0.059%. On August 7, 2018, the Plaintiff caused a traffic accident that meets the border line of the road while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.173% from the Do near the ebbbbbbbbroon ebroke-dong (hereinafter “instant drinking”). On August 7, 2018, the Plaintiff was subject to the suspension of the driver’s license by driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of 0.173%.

B. On August 21, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the license for driving under the preceding paragraph (hereinafter “instant disposition”) by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act to the Plaintiff on the ground of the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the E Committee, but was dismissed on October 17, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 1, 2, 4, 6 evidence, Eul's 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff is an individual taxi driver and has a means to maintain the driving of a vehicle, and the 91-year old mother who suffers from a disease such as high blood pressure must frequently visit the hospital. Therefore, the driver's license is essential, and the plaintiff suffers from an insulgic urology urology, hemosis, hemical transfusion, and high blood pressure, and the plaintiff must support her mother, her spouse, and 2 children, and the plaintiff must report the death accident and receive an official commendation from the head of Seoul Central Police Station. In light of the above, the disposition of this case is in violation of discretionary authority and abuse.

B. The issue of whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms is the subject of the disposition, and the public interest and the subject of the disposition in question.