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 10, 2019, at around 03:10, the Plaintiff driven C-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-C (hereinafter “instant drinking driving”) under the influence of alcohol level of 0.204% on the front of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant driving”).

B. On April 8, 2019, 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 dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on April 9, 2019, but was dismissed on May 14, 2019.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 6 through 9, the purport of the whole entries and arguments

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of all circumstances, the Plaintiff’s assertion actively cooperates in the investigation of drunk driving after the pertinent drunk driving, and the driving distance is only 300 meters, the Plaintiff’s operation of the vehicle as a company member in charge of maintenance and repair of airport facilities is essential, economic difficulties are experienced, and there are family members to support, etc., the instant disposition is beyond the scope of discretion or abuse of discretionary authority.

B. Determination 1 as to whether an administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretionary power ought to be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to the relevant administrative disposition by objectively examining the content of the offense committed as the ground for disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant administrative act, and all relevant circumstances.

In this case, even if the criteria for punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the administrative agency's internal rules for administrative affairs, and it is not effective externally to guarantee citizens or courts, and whether the pertinent disposition is legitimate or not.