1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. At around 17:40 on May 10, 2019, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.198% of blood alcohol level, was driving a chip low-income motor vehicle and driving a D village in front of the D village located in C in the chemical city C, the Plaintiff left the left part of the chip-hand side of the chip-type motor vehicle, which is different from the opposite direction, and went away without taking necessary measures, even though he/she was stopped in front of the left part of the Plaintiff’s motor vehicle.

B. On June 21, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Class II ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff was unable to take measures against and report on the person due to a traffic accident while driving a motor vehicle” (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 August 13, 2019.

Afterward, the prosecution's office on October 22, 2019 the plaintiff's status.

With respect to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes), each prosecution was instituted against the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes)

Accordingly, on November 1, 2019, the Defendant changed the reason for the instant disposition to “her driver under the influence of alcohol level of at least 0.1%” and notified the Plaintiff thereof.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, 32, Eul evidence 1 to 26, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist 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 working as a real estate brokerage assistant and an insurance solicitor.