1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Around 10:40 on July 21, 2017, the Plaintiff driven approximately 50 meters prior to the Daejeon Pungdong hot spring-dong, Daejeon Pungdong, where the trade name of the B K7 car cannot be known while under the influence of alcohol of 0.2% of alcohol content.

B. On July 28, 2017, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition to the Plaintiff on the grounds of Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act, which revoked the driver’s license (Class II common).

On August 14, 2017, the Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the said request on October 11, 2017.

【Fact-finding, Gap’s evidence, Eul’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul’s evidence No. 4 through 11, the gist of the whole pleadings

2. In full view of the following: (i) the Plaintiff’s instant disposition is lawful; (ii) the Plaintiff is merely a simple drunk driving without any personal or material injury accident; (iii) the Plaintiff actively cooperates with the investigation agency; and (iv) the family life system is responsible for working as an occupation soldier; and (iv) the instant disposition is unlawful as it deviates from

According to Article 93(1)1 of the Luxembourg Road Traffic Act and Article 91(1)28 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, when operating a vehicle in a drunken state (not less than 0.1% of blood alcohol level) shall be determined on the basis of the revocation of the license, and the disposal penalty points shall be mitigated to 110 points for “a person who is an important means to maintain his family’s livelihood or is engaged in transportation service for not less than three years at the time of the disposition as an exemplary driver, or who has received an official commendation from the chief of a police station or higher by causing a traffic accident and arresting an escape driver and does not meet the specified requirements for exclusion.” One of the requirements for exclusion from mitigation, where a person drives a vehicle in the blood alcohol level exceeding 0.12% among the requirements for exclusion from mitigation, the person who causes a personal traffic accident while driving under influence.