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 27, 2019, at around 01:13, the Plaintiff driven a section of approximately 500 meters from the alcohol level B while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.130%, and from the upper dong in the Gyeonggi-si to the front road in the Gyeonggi-do.

B. On November 21, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.08%, which is the base value for revocation of the license (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. On December 9, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition. However, the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on January 21, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 17 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the distance of the vehicle driving is relatively short of 300 meters due to the Plaintiff’s drunk driving and the distance of the vehicle driving is relatively short, since the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the Plaintiff’s driver’s license, the law has been complied with, and has been exemplary driving except for minor violation of the regulations regarding recommendations for about 11 years, without any traffic accidents or force of driving under the influence of alcohol, the use of ordinary driving, active cooperation on the detection, and the Plaintiff is engaged in a self-distribution business of building materials. Considering the characteristics of the Plaintiff’s business, the Plaintiff is in need of a driver’s license due to its nature, the Plaintiff’s family support, and the economic situation is insufficient, the instant disposition should be revoked as it is in violation of the law that deviates from and abused discretionary power by excessively excessive to the Plaintiff.

B. Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms, the substance of the offense as the ground for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the circumstances pertaining thereto.