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 February 13, 2018, at around 23:38, the Plaintiff was driving the third drunk vehicle while under the influence of alcohol 0.081%.

B. Accordingly, on March 6, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke a driver’s license (class I and II small businesses) for the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion did not cause a traffic accident, the Plaintiff ought to drive with frequent business trips, reflects the depth of the Plaintiff’s loss of driver’s license, and undergo difficulties in supporting the family, the instant disposition is beyond the scope of discretion or abuse of discretionary power.

B. Determination 1 as to whether an 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 the relevant administrative disposition by objectively examining the content of the offense committed as the ground for disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant administrative act, and all relevant circumstances.

In this case, even if the criteria for disciplinary administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ministerial Ordinance, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the administrative affairs rules inside the administrative agency, and thus, it is not effective externally to guarantee citizens or courts. Whether such disposition is legitimate or not must be determined in accordance with the contents and purport of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, not only the above disposition criteria,

Therefore, the disposition can not be said to be legitimate, but the above disposition disposition does not conform with the Constitution or the law itself, or a sanction in accordance with the above disposition disposition has become the ground for the disposition.