The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 21, 2020, at around 00:01, the Plaintiff driven C vehicle while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.120% on the front side of Busan Jung-gu.

B. On June 4, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the driver’s license stated in the purport of the claim pursuant to Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff driven under the influence of alcohol 0.120% of blood alcohol level.

C. On August 18, 2020, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on the instant disposition, but the said claim was dismissed on September 22, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1-1, 1-2, and 3-3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In light of the following: (a) since the Plaintiff’s assertion obtained a driver’s license in 2009, the Plaintiff’s disposition of this case is unlawful by abusing its discretionary authority, in light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s assertion was doing safe driving without traffic accidents or driving history; (b) the driving distance of about 3 km in the state of drinking; (c) the Plaintiff actively cooperated in the enforcement process; (d) the business-related driver’s license is required; (e) the cancellation of the driver’s license is difficult to support his livelihood and family; and (e)

B. In light of the fact that a motor vehicle is a mass means of transportation and accordingly, the need to strictly observe traffic regulations is greater as the traffic situation is congested on the day, and the traffic accidents caused by drinking driving are frequent and there are many cases where the results are harsh, so it is necessary to strictly control driving to protect the majority of drivers and pedestrians, the need for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving should be more serious, and the revocation of a driver's license is different from the cancellation of the ordinary beneficial administrative act.