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 April 21, 1990, the Plaintiff acquired a Class II ordinary driver’s license (B), and around July 18, 2017, around 22:28, 2017, the Plaintiff controlled C-Wts’ car volume as a 50-meter driving day under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.102% from before the commercial unclaimed restaurant located in the Gyeongnam-si, Gyeongnam-si to the roads front of the shooting distance in the Hanam-si.

B. On September 11, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the driver’s license stated in the preceding paragraph as of October 14, 2017 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act to the Plaintiff on the ground of the drunk driving as stated in the preceding paragraph.

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on December 5, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is minor in the blood alcohol concentration level at the time of crackdown, the plaintiff supports her mother, her wife, and 2 children. The plaintiff does not have any specific expertise, and there is no need for a driver's license to maintain family's livelihood, such as supplying agricultural products to the market and occasionally moving them to the warehouse management. The plaintiff is modeled for about 30 years, and the disposition of this case is against the abuse of discretionary authority.

B. Determination 1 whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms or not shall be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to the disposition, by objectively examining the content of the act of violation as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the act of disposal, and all relevant circumstances. In this case, even if the criteria for the punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ministerial Ordinance, it is stipulated in the internal rules