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 February 4, 2019, at around 02:46, the Plaintiff driven a B-40 vehicle owned by himself/herself while under the influence of alcohol of 0.139%, and 100 meters from the roads in the front of Busan-si, Seocheon-si, Nowon-gu, Seoul-si, to the roads in front of Busan-si.

B. On March 14, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the Class II 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 April 9, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the plaintiff's assertion is that the plaintiff has been forced to drive the plaintiff's vehicle in the parking lot where the plaintiff's vehicle was installed at the time when there are many visitors at the time when they are placed, and it has been inevitable to leave the vehicle in order to get the vehicle at a harsh time, there is no physical or physical damage due to the plaintiff's drinking driving, the distance from drinking driving is short, the plaintiff is going against and again not to drive under the influence of alcohol, the plaintiff has a traffic accident for about 21 years since the plaintiff acquired the driver's license, or there is no history of driving under the influence of alcohol, and the plaintiff is seeking to introduce a nursing doctor to the hospital, and considering the characteristics of the day, it is difficult for the plaintiff to continue driving when the driver's license is revoked because it is too harsh to the plaintiff, and thus, the disposition of this case is revoked.

B. The issue of whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms is the subject of the disposition.