1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of disposition;

A. On September 13, 2017, the Plaintiff holding a Class I driver’s license for large vehicles and Class I driver’s license for ordinary vehicles was under the influence of alcohol of 0.114% while driving a 4.5 tons of freight vehicles at the entrance of the Jinjin-ri-ri, Jindong Highway at the Jinwon-gun, Jindong Highway.

B. On November 1, 2017, the Defendant notified the revocation of the Plaintiff’s respective driver’s license on the ground of the above drunk driving.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

On November 27, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the claim was dismissed on February 27, 2018.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1, 7 evidence, Eul's 1 through 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Although the Defendant established and operated the Driver’s License Deliberation Committee to relieve a person whose blood alcohol concentration is below 0.12% and whose family’s livelihood is an important means to maintain his family’s livelihood, it is unlawful for the Plaintiff to revoke the driver’s license without applying it to the Plaintiff. 2) On the day of the instant case, the Defendant, at around 19:00, when carrying the building materials on the day of the instant case onto the truck and operating to the Gangseo branch of the destination, arrived at the cargo driver’s office, etc., and 2-3 residuess in the cargo driver’s office, and was locked with the cargo driver’s 2-3 residues, and the Plaintiff was able to take advantage of the need to transport the building materials immediately after being caught by the owner, and was able to control drinking, and the Plaintiff maintained his livelihood with the truck driver’s license due to the cancellation of the driver’s license. In full view of the following circumstances, the Defendant’s disposition of this case’s model discretion was made by taking account of traffic accidents.

(b) relevant legislation;