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 May 30, 2019, at around 22:41, the Plaintiff driven D vehicles under the influence of alcohol level of 0.167% at the front of the C convenience store located in the Chungcheongnam-nam Budget Group B (hereinafter “instant drinking”).

B. On June 21, 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s driver’s license (Class 1 common) on the ground of the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on July 15, 2019, but was dismissed on August 29, 2019.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1 through 6, the purport of the whole entries and arguments

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. In light of all circumstances, the Plaintiff asserted that actively cooperated in the investigation of drunk driving after the pertinent drunk driving, that the distance of drunk driving is only five meters, that is, an accidentless driving career for 11 years, that is, the Plaintiff’s vehicle operation is essential in performing the business of collecting and delivering agricultural products in E-cooperative and having economic difficulties and there are family members to support, etc., the instant disposition is beyond the scope of discretionary authority or abuse discretionary authority.

B. Determination 1 as to whether a punitive administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretionary power ought to be determined by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on public interest and the disadvantages suffered by an individual due to such disposition by objectively examining the content of the offense committed as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all relevant circumstances.

In this case, even if the standard of punitive administrative disposition is prescribed in the form of Ordinance, it is nothing more than that of the administrative agency's internal rules for administrative affairs, and therefore there is no effect to guarantee the people or the court externally.