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 December 2, 2013, the Plaintiff acquired a Class 1 driver’s license for ordinary vehicles (B), and was driven on and around December 2, 2013. On May 18, 2015, the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol at 0.130% of alcohol level on May 18, 2015, and was found to have been exposed to the drinking control while driving approximately about 10 meters of the Plaintiff’s wife’s car volume on the roads in Songpa-gu Seoul.

B. Accordingly, on May 29, 2015, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license pursuant to Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act on the ground that the Plaintiff driven the same alcohol as above.

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal on August 25, 2015, but was dismissed on October 2, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Entry No. 5 Eul and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that he was the Plaintiff’s substitute engineer, and then parked the vehicle again after moving about about 10 meters from the alleyway without having to find the difference, and no traffic accident occurred due to drinking driving. Considering the fact that the Plaintiff is in charge of purchasing agricultural products, if his driver’s license is revoked, it would lose his workplace and it is difficult for the Plaintiff and his family to maintain their livelihood, the Defendant’s disposition of this case constitutes a case where the Plaintiff’s disposition of this case was excessively harsh and thus constitutes a case where he deviates from or abused its discretion.

B. In today’s rise of the number of vehicles today, and the number of driver’s licenses are issued in large volume, so the need to strictly observe traffic regulations is increasing as traffic conditions are congested, and in particular, traffic accidents caused by drunk driving are frequently frequent and the results are harsh, so it is very important for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drunk driving. Therefore, revocation of driver’s licenses on the grounds of drunk driving is different from revocation of ordinary beneficial administrative acts.