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 November 30, 2018, at around 23:21, the Plaintiff driven a B-hand vehicle while under the influence of alcohol of 0.182%, from the roads before Kimpo-si, Kimpo-ro 39, Kimpo-ro, Kimpo-ro, 100 meters.

B. On December 21, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.1%, which is the criteria for revoking the license.

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on February 12, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion does not cause any personal or material injury due to the Plaintiff’s drinking driving, the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the driver’s license that caused a traffic accident for about nine years or has no record of driving under the influence of alcohol, the Plaintiff is going against and is expected not to drive under the influence of alcohol again, and the Plaintiff is required not to drive the vehicle because there are many equipment that the Plaintiff has to travel in the Seoul Metropolitan area as well as in the local areas while working as a water quality engineer and have to move in to the local areas, so it is necessary to drive the vehicle because there are many equipment that the Plaintiff should have left to the site. When the license is revoked, the instant disposition is so harsh that the Plaintiff is unable to perform his duties, and thus there is an abuse of discretion. Therefore, the instant disposition should

B. The issue of whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion under the social norms is public interest by objectively examining the content of the offense as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all other relevant circumstances.