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 7, 2019, at around 09:30, the Plaintiff driven a DK5 vehicle while under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.095% on the front of C in Busan Seo-gu, Busan at around 09:30.

(hereinafter referred to as “dacting driving of this case”). B.

On April 16, 2009, at around 02:20 on April 16, 2009, the Plaintiff was found to have been driven while under the influence of alcohol 0.143%.

C. On August 7, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license for Class 1, Class 2, and Class 2 motor vehicles under Article 93(1)2 of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff is a person driving under the second or higher influence on the ground that the Plaintiff was a person driving under the second or higher influence of alcohol (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

On August 26, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the said claim was dismissed on October 1, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 4, Eul's 1 through 4, and each entry of Eul's 1 through 4

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was unable to feel a drink after drinking alcohol prior to the instant drunk driving, taking full view of the alcohol prior to the instant drunk driving, and driving the Plaintiff.

In this case, no damage has occurred due to the drinking driving of this case, the plaintiff only moved 3 km, and actively cooperate in the investigation.

The Plaintiff is engaged in an expressway maintenance and repair business, and when the equipment repair occurs, it is essential to immediately move, and to operate various vehicles related to the business, and the driver's license is also required due to the distance from work. The current mother and the hospital are supported by the money to be supported by the mother and the hospital. As such, when the instant disposition is maintained, the livelihood of the Plaintiff and the family is threatened.

Considering these circumstances, the Plaintiff’s private interest infringed on the public interest that would be achieved by the instant disposition is considerably large.