The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 16, 2020, at around 21:00, the Plaintiff driven C vehicle under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.066% at the front of Seosan City B (hereinafter “instant drinking”).

B. On February 25, 2020, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (class 1 ordinary) pursuant to Article 93(1)2 of the Road Traffic Act on the ground that the Plaintiff was driving under the influence of alcohol in the instant case even though he had been under the influence of alcohol in the past (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on May 12, 2020.

On the other hand, the plaintiff has driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol before driving the motor vehicle in this case.

[1.26 November 26, 2009. Driving (0.071% of blood alcohol level). 【Ground of Recognition】 Facts without any dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 3, 6, Eul 1, 2, 4, and 8 (including additional numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of all circumstances such as the Plaintiff’s assertion that the flow of traffic was obstructed or the occurrence of a traffic accident, the distance of drunk driving is less than 300 meters, active cooperation was made in the investigation into a drunk driving after the pertinent drunk driving, the Plaintiff is in charge of the business in the company, which is essential to operate the vehicle on duty, is suffering from economic difficulties, and there are family members to support, etc., the instant disposition was excessively harsh to the Plaintiff and abused discretion.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. According to the proviso of Article 93(1) of the Road Traffic Act and Article 93(1)2 of the same Act, in a case where a person discovered due to a drunk driving or a refusal of measurement of drinking again drives a motor vehicle and thus falls under the grounds for the suspension of driver’s license, the commissioner of a district police agency