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 January 20, 2019, at around 19:25, the Plaintiff driven a C Inquitolu vehicle while under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.156% on the front of the Bupyeong-gu Incheon Bupyeong-gu B (hereinafter “instant drinking”).

B. On February 12, 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 February 19, 2019, but was dismissed on April 2, 2019.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1, 2, Eul's 4 through 7, the purport of the whole entries and arguments

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff actively cooperated in the investigation of drinking alcohol after the driving of this case, the driving distance was very short, and the driving distance was caused to the drinking driving of this case in order to keep the distance from the wall, and the distance of the vehicle was left at the wall. The plaintiff considered all circumstances such as the fact that the driving of the vehicle as a person responsible for the development of the vehicle constitutes an essential and living means, economic difficulties, and there are family members to support the vehicle. The disposition of this case exceeded the scope of discretion or abused discretionary power.

B. Determination 1 as to whether an 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 the relevant administrative disposition by objectively examining the content of the offense committed as the ground for disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant administrative act, and all relevant circumstances.

In such cases, even if the criteria for punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance, it is only that the administrative agency's internal rules for administrative affairs are prescribed.