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 September 6, 2007, the Plaintiff acquired a Class 1 ordinary driver’s license (B) on November 29, 2015, and on November 22, 2015, at around 0.120% of blood alcohol level, C SPP was under the influence of alcohol level 0.120% on November 29, 2015, and was under the influence of alcohol level 50 meters prior to the border zone in the Gyeong-dong, Gwangju City, and was under the influence of alcohol level.

B. Accordingly, on December 9, 2015, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s driver’s license pursuant to Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act on the ground that the Plaintiff was driving under influence of alcohol as above.

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal on December 21, 2015, but was dismissed on February 2, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence No. 2, Evidence No. 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff’s action constitutes a case where the Plaintiff was excessively harsh and the Plaintiff’s discretion was abused and abused, and thus, the Plaintiff’s action constitutes a case where the Plaintiff violated its discretionary authority, considering the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s act of delivering and collecting tobacco to the customer; and (b) the Plaintiff is engaged in a business of delivering and collecting tobacco to the customer; and (c) the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is essential and revoked; and (d) the Plaintiff’s livelihood is difficult.

B. The need to strictly observe traffic regulations is increasing due to the rapid increase of motor vehicles today, the large number of driver's licenses are issued, and traffic conditions are congested on the day, and in particular, traffic accidents caused by drinking driving are frequently frequent and the results are harsh, so it is very important for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving. Therefore, in revocation of driver's licenses on the grounds of drinking driving on the grounds of drinking driving, unlike revocation of ordinary beneficial administrative acts, the general preventive aspect should be emphasized to prevent such revocation rather than disadvantage to the party who will suffer from such revocation.