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 September 19, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s Class II ordinary driver’s license as of October 6, 2014 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.131% of blood alcohol content on August 23, 2014, driven a Category II ordinary driver’s license for the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff driven a Category B Poter freight vehicle from D on the street around the city of Southern-si to E (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

B. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on November 14, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 5, whole purport of oral argument

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the plaintiff bears the expenses for the hospital of the first-class female with intellectual disability, bears a large amount of debts, and is living by driving while performing electrical construction. Thus, although the driver's license is essential, the defendant's disposition of this case is a deviation or abuse of discretion.

B. In the modern society where a motor vehicle becomes a public and universal means of transportation, the increase of traffic accidents and the harm and injury caused by drinking driving should be regulated, and the necessity of public interest should be emphasized. Thus, the revocation of a driving license on the ground of drinking driving should be emphasized more than the disadvantage of the party subject to revocation, unlike the revocation of a general beneficial administrative act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Du17021, Dec. 27, 2007). Thus, the general preventive aspect for establishing traffic order and social safety should be more considered than the disadvantage of the plaintiff subject to the disposition in this case.

The plaintiff's driver's license is essential because the plaintiff is responsible for his/her family's livelihood and is self-employed by driving.