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 10, 1995, the Plaintiff acquired a Class 1 ordinary driver’s license (B). On March 5, 2017, the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol 0.068% under the influence of alcohol, and was subject to suspension of driver’s license and penalty points of 80 (under the influence of alcohol 0.068%, after completing the education course for general knowledge, to reduce the penalty points of 20 points).

B. On December 2, 2017, the Plaintiff, at around 03:25, again at the Dart parking lot located in Osan City, Osan-si, is deemed to be the “dact-free driving” in which, under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.068%, the Efran vehicle quantity is approximately 5 meters and below 5m, under the influence of alcohol level.

(C) On January 2, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the driver’s license described in Article 93(2) of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”) on the ground that the accumulated penalty points for one year against the Plaintiff constituted 180 points exceeding 121 points (i.e., 80 points) on the ground that the accumulated penalty points for one year for the Plaintiff constitutes the revocation of the license described in Article 93(2) of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”).

D. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on April 10, 2018. However, the Plaintiff was dismissed on April 10, 2018. [In the event that there is no dispute over the grounds of recognition, the entries in Gap’s 1 through 4, Eul’s 1 through 15, and the purport of the entire pleadings.]

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff did not cause a traffic accident through the drinking driving of this case; the plaintiff used the ordinary driving of this case; the possibility and risk of criticism was low; the plaintiff has been in charge of the test and development of the motor vehicle as the head of the NBB Korea Team of NBBa Co., Ltd. for 20 years; therefore, the company's business and the driver's license for the maintenance of livelihood are essential; the blood alcohol concentration is minor; the plaintiff actively cooperates with the investigation agency about the drinking driving of this case; the plaintiff is against the duty to actively cooperate with and reflects with the investigation agency about the drinking driving of this case; the plaintiff's care expenses and living expenses for the mother-child who suffers from the liver, the liver, the liver, and the luminous