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 October 19, 2019, at around 05:00, the Plaintiff driven C vehicle under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.07% at the front of the Jinjin-si (hereinafter “instant drinking”).

B. On November 30, 2019, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class 1 large, Class 1 ordinary) pursuant to Article 93(1)2 of the Road Traffic Act on the ground that the Plaintiff was driving under the influence of alcohol in the instant case even though he had past history of driving.

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on February 18, 2020.

On the other hand, the plaintiff has driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol before driving the motor vehicle in this case.

[Retoxicing on September 8, 2016 (0.054% of blood alcohol level). 【Dispact-based ground for recognition】 Facts without any dispute, Gap’s 1, 2, 4, Eul’s 1, 2, 4, and 8 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of all circumstances, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the drinking driving of this case interfered with the flow of traffic or did not cause any traffic accident, the distance of the Plaintiff’s driving and the distance of the Plaintiff’s driving is relatively short of about 5km, the Plaintiff actively cooperated in the investigation into the drinking driving after the pertinent drinking driving, the Plaintiff used the ordinary driving, and the Plaintiff was engaged in the freight transport business and engaged in economic difficulties and there are family members to support, etc., the instant disposition was abused or abused the discretion by excessively harshing the Plaintiff.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. According to the proviso of Article 93(1) of the Road Traffic Act and Article 93(2) of the same Act, the commissioner of a district police agency is necessarily a driver in cases where a person discovered due to drinking or refusal to measure drinking again drives a motor vehicle and thus constitutes grounds for suspending the driver’s license