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 4, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol of 0.158% of blood alcohol level around 14:53 on October 26, 2019, the Defendant driven the B vehicle up to approximately 1 km on the front side of the Dog-si, Jin-si, Jin-si, Kim Jong-si, who was on the street before the front side of the Changwon-si’s Dog-si’s trile.” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

B. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on November 27, 2019, but a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim was rendered on January 7, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 11, 16 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 8, 14 evidence (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The instant disposition constitutes abuse of discretion when considering the Plaintiff’s assertion of disability that requires a professional driver’s license as a disabled person, the family’s livelihood is responsible, and the driving of a long-term accident.

B. (1) Determination is highly necessary for the public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, because of the frequent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving today, and the results thereof are harsh, and when the driver's license is revoked on the ground of drinking driving, unlike the cancellation of the general beneficial administrative act, the general preventive aspect that should prevent drinking driving rather than the disadvantage of the party due to the cancellation should be more emphasized.

(2) In the instant case, the Plaintiff’s alcohol level is 0.158% of blood alcohol level, and the criteria for revocation of the driver’s license under Article 91(1) [Attachment Table 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act (the blood alcohol level is 0.08% or more), the Plaintiff caused a traffic accident that causes physical damage due to the instant drinking driving, the Plaintiff was exposed to the refusal of the drinking alcohol measurement in 2015, and the inevitable circumstances in which the Plaintiff had to drive at the time.