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 November 13, 2006, the Plaintiff driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of 0.054%, while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.054% on November 16, 2006, the Plaintiff driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of 0.078% on November 16, 2006, while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.057% on September 14, 2012.

B. After that, on November 3, 2018, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.074% of blood alcohol level around 01:03, driven a passenger car in B SP site, and 100 meters from the front road located in Suwon-si C, Suwon-si to the front road of the same towing station.

C. On November 16, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking Class 1 and Class 1 ordinary drivers’ licenses to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff had been driving again under the influence of drinking at least twice.

The Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on January 8, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion that no personal or material damage has occurred due to the Plaintiff’s drunk driving, the Plaintiff’s reflects the fact that the Plaintiff would not drive under the influence of alcohol again, and the Plaintiff’s work as a seller at the company. In light of the fact that the license is revoked, the Plaintiff is in a position to discontinue work because it is impossible to perform its duties and it is in a position to discontinue work, etc., the instant disposition should be revoked because it is too harsh to the Plaintiff and constitutes an

B. The proviso of Article 93(1) of the Road Traffic Act and Article 93(2) of the same Act provide that the driver’s license shall be revoked in cases where a person who has driven at least twice a drunk driving again constitutes grounds for the suspension of driver’s license.