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 11, 2019, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol at 04:40% of alcohol level, driven a 15km car from the Gangseodong of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to the front road of 1687 units in Incheon Gyeyang-dong 337-6, and sustained injury to the driver of the above damaged vehicle for about two weeks, by towing a opa A4 car parked in front of the said 1687 unit for traffic signal.

B. On July 30, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff had injured the Plaintiff due to a traffic accident while driving a drunk (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 October 1, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1 to 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff has no history of traffic accident or driving under the influence of alcohol for about 18 years since the Plaintiff acquired the Plaintiff’s driver’s license, and that the Plaintiff is expected not to drive under the influence of alcohol again against the present one, and the Plaintiff is required to open to 07:30 due to the characteristics of the Plaintiff’s pharmacy while in office as a pharmacy’s office. The Plaintiff’s commuting time is at least one hour and needs to take up two hours depending on the road condition or weather when using public transportation, so the cancellation of the driver’s license is difficult to perform his/her duties, making it difficult to perform his/her duties, and the Plaintiff has to support his/her spouse and two children, and have to pay 50 million won or more to the Plaintiff while operating his/her business in the Plaintiff’s name. In light of the above, the instant disposition should be revoked because the Plaintiff violated the law of abuse of discretion by excessively harshing the Plaintiff.

(b) judgment;