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 January 2, 2020, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol 0.128% from blood alcohol level on January 2, 2020, driven a Bstoke car from the front of the “ro-distance” in the Nam-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City, and from the front of the “ro-distance” in the Dong-gu, Nam-gu, Incheon, Seoul, the 15km km from the front of the Bstowing-dong Highway in the middle of the Bstop.

B. On March 14, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.08%, which is the base value for revocation of the license (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on April 28, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is against the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff is going to not drive under the influence of alcohol again, and the Plaintiff is in office as an external food franchise Sbaz. In light of the characteristics of the Plaintiff’s business, when the driver’s license is revoked due to frequent business trips, it is difficult to perform its duties, and the Plaintiff’s economic situation is very difficult. In light of the fact that the instant disposition is too harsh to the Plaintiff, and thus, it should be revoked because it constitutes an abuse of discretionary power by abusing the Plaintiff’s discretion.

B. Determination 1 whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms or not shall be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to such disposition by objectively examining the content of the violation as the grounds for the disposition in question, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition in question, and all relevant circumstances.