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 May 7, 2017, at around 23:29, the Plaintiff driven B vehicles under the influence of alcohol level of 0.144% in front of the orchard, Seo-gu, Daejeon.

(hereinafter referred to as “drinking driving of this case”). (b)

On May 25, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 common) on the ground of the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the said claim was dismissed on August 8, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 17, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In the Plaintiff’s assertion, there was no personal and material injury accident against another person; the Plaintiff was employed as a living rehabilitation teacher in a facility for the disabled, and thus, the occupational driver’s license is absolutely necessary; and the Plaintiff is a situation where the parent is responsible for the livelihood of the parent as the male head of three girls and one male head, and unless there is a license, the instant disposition is unlawful by abusing or abusing discretionary authority.

B. Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion under the social norms shall be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement of public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to the relevant disposition, by objectively examining the content of the violation as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the relevant circumstances. In this case, even if the criteria for the punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance of the Ministry, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the internal administrative affairs rules of the administrative agency, and it is not effective externally to the public or the court. The issue of whether the disposition is legitimate is in accordance with