The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 26, 2019, at around 03:10 on December 26, 2019, the Plaintiff driven C vehicle while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.084% in front of the latter part of the Daejeon Seo-gu Daejeon B market (hereinafter “instant drinking”).

B. On January 23, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (the Plaintiff’s license of large class 1, class 1, class 1, class 2, and class 2) on the ground of the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on April 28, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 3, 7, Eul's 1, 2, and 4 (including virtual numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff alleged that the Plaintiff actively cooperated in the investigation of drunk driving after the pertinent drunk driving, the occurrence of human and physical damage, the distance of drunk driving is a relatively short of 1 km, the Plaintiff’s vehicle operation is essential as cargo vehicle article, economic difficulties, and there are family members to support the vehicle. In light of all circumstances, the instant disposition is beyond the scope of discretionary authority or abused discretionary authority.

B. Determination 1 as to whether a punitive administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretionary power ought to be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to such disposition by objectively examining the content of the offense committed as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all relevant circumstances.

In this case, even if the criteria for punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the internal rules for administrative affairs of administrative agencies, and it is an external citizen or court.