1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On January 26, 2015, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class 1 common), as of February 26, 2015, on the ground that the Plaintiff driven C vehicles while under the influence of alcohol of 0.170% in front of the Seoul Jung-gu, Seoul, on December 6, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Class A, Evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the following: (a) while the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was running a drunk driving at the time, a minor contact occurred while moving a short distance from the short place to the short place of the driver’s license; (b) there are circumstances to consider the situation of drinking driving due to the occurrence of minor contact; and (c) the Plaintiff and his family members, who agreed with the victim after the accident, making the printing and promotion of the instant disposition difficult for the livelihood of the Plaintiff and their family members, the instant disposition should be revoked because it constitutes an illegal disposition that deviates from discretion and abused by excessively harshing the Plaintiff.

B. In light of the fact that the number of vehicles rapidly increasing today as well as the number of driver's licenses are issued in large volume, and the need to strictly observe traffic regulations according to the reduction of traffic conditions is increasing, and the traffic accidents caused by the driving of a motor vehicle are frequently frequent and the result thereof is harsh, so it is necessary to strictly regulate the driving of a motor vehicle on the ground of the driving of a motor vehicle, the revocation of the driver's licenses on the ground of the driving of a motor vehicle should be emphasized more than the disadvantage of the party who will suffer from the revocation of the revocation, unlike the cancellation of the general beneficial administrative act (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Du2535, Feb. 14, 2008). In light of the need for public interest to prevent the traffic accidents caused by the driving of a motor vehicle on the ground of the above mentioned above, and the purport of each entry in the certificate No. 4 through No. 10 and all pleadings.