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, 2013, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s license for driving Class 1 large, Class 1 ordinary, and Class 1 special, Class 1 (Baer) driving license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff driven B vehicles under the influence of alcohol content of 0.141% on August 18, 2013, on the ground that the Plaintiff driven a blood alcohol level of 0.20%.

B. The Plaintiff underwent the pre-trial procedure.

【Fact-finding without dispute over the ground for recognition, Gap evidence 1, 7 evidence, Eul evidence 1 and 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. At the time of the detection of alcohol driving of the instant case, the Plaintiff d restaurant located in the Gyeongnam-gun of Busan Metropolitan City at the time of the detection of alcohol driving of the instant case: (a) driven the vehicle in front of the e-mail store; (b) parked the vehicle; (c) reported that the vehicle was being driven by the vehicle; and (d) reported that the fighting was waiting for the engine, and that the fighting was bread and collected two funds; (b) the blood alcohol concentration was measured to 0.141% from the alcohol measurement at around 18:59 after the police called the police, and then the blood alcohol concentration was measured to 0.141% from the alcohol measurement at around 18:59; and (c) the actual blood alcohol concentration at the time of the drunk driving of the instant case was measured to 0.141% higher than the actual blood alcohol concentration.

Furthermore, given that the Plaintiff served as a personal taxi driver, the Plaintiff’s license is essential for his family’s livelihood, the driving distance is only 50 meters, and there is no power other than the suspension of license due to a drunk driving in 1996, etc., the instant disposition by the Defendant constitutes an unlawful case where the Defendant’s disposition constitutes a deviation or abuse of discretionary power.

B. In full view of the argument on the accuracy of blood alcohol content first, as to the argument on the accuracy of blood alcohol content, comprehensively taking account of the aforementioned evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings in the written evidence as well as evidence Nos. 5 through 7, the Plaintiff’s drinking at a D restaurant located in the Gyeong-gun, Busan District Court from August 18, 2013 to 18:20, and thereafter, it is clear for the Plaintiff to have drinking at the D restaurant located in the Gyeong-gun, Busan District. The Plaintiff started driving from the above D restaurant around that time.