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 January 3, 2020, the Plaintiff driven B vehicles while under the influence of alcohol of 0.082% of alcohol level around 21:45.

B. Accordingly, on January 30, 2020, the Defendant rendered a decision to revoke the driver's license (class 1 common) to the Plaintiff by applying Article 93 (1) 1 of the Road Traffic Act.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

On April 28, 2020, an administrative appeal filed by the Plaintiff against the instant disposition was dismissed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 12 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. In light of the Plaintiff’s assertion that there was no damage caused by drinking driving of the instant case, the distance of movement is relatively short of 3km, the confession, etc. actively cooperates in the detection of drinking driving, and the driver’s license of a company that runs a wholesale retail business is absolutely necessary when the driver’s license is revoked, there is difficulty in maintaining livelihood, supporting family support, repaying debts, and conducting ordinary supporting activities, etc., the instant disposition is unlawful by abusing its discretion, since it is much much more unfavorable for the Plaintiff that is contrary to the public interest to be achieved, and thus, it is unlawful by abusing its discretion.

B. In light of the fact that one motor vehicle is a mass means of transportation and accordingly, the need to strictly observe traffic regulations is greater as the traffic situation becomes complicated, and the traffic accidents caused by drinking driving are frequently frequent and the results are harsh, so it is necessary to strictly regulate driving to protect the majority of drivers and pedestrians, the need for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, and the revocation of a driver’s license is more severe than the cancellation of the ordinary beneficial administrative act.