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 October 5, 2018, at around 21:15, the Plaintiff driven CEX car while under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.161% on the roads near Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B.

B. On October 30, 2018, the Defendant rendered a notice of revocation of the first-class ordinary vehicle driver’s license and the second-class motorcycle driver’s license on October 30, 2018 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the grounds that the Plaintiff was under influence of alcohol more than 0.1% of the blood alcohol level based on the revocation of 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 November 28, 2018.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1, 2, Eul's 1, 4 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was in office as a marina delivery, and thus, the Plaintiff abused discretion by excessively harshly considering various circumstances, such as making it difficult for the Plaintiff to drive a motor vehicle on the part of its nature and make it difficult for the Plaintiff to maintain occupation and livelihood with the instant disposition.

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 criteria for punitive administrative disposition are prescribed in the form of Ordinance, it is nothing more than that prescribed in the administrative agency's internal rules for administrative affairs, and thus, it is not effective externally to guarantee citizens or courts. Whether such disposition is legitimate or not should be determined in accordance with the contents and purport of the relevant laws and regulations, not only the above criteria for disposition