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 23, 1998, the Plaintiff acquired and driven Class 1 common vehicles, Class 1 special vehicles of October 6, 2008, and Class 1 large automobile driving licenses (B). On December 21, 2014, at around 01:25, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol at around 0.124% of the blood alcohol alcohol level, was found to have been driven at approximately 100 meters from the Pyeongtaek-dong to the ordinary-dong of Pyeongtaek-si, and was exposed to the drinking control.

B. Accordingly, on December 31, 2014, the Defendant issued 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 as above.

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal on February 6, 2015, but was dismissed on March 17, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Eul evidence No. 4

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff could not have a substitute driver's license due to the lack of cash on the ground of the plaintiff's ground, and the plaintiff can only retire when the driver's license is essential and revoked due to the worker's duty of carrying vehicles for export for export. When the driver's license is revoked, it is difficult for the plaintiff and his family to live, and the plaintiff has no record of being punished due to drinking driving, etc., the disposition of this case constitutes an unlawful act because it constitutes a case where

B. The need to strictly observe traffic regulations is increasing due to the rapid increase of motor vehicles today, the large number of driver's licenses are issued, and traffic conditions are congested on the day, 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, the revocation of driver's licenses on the grounds of drunk driving should be prevented rather than the disadvantage of the party who will suffer from the revocation, unlike the cancellation of the ordinary beneficial administrative act.