1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, around 01:00 on June 4, 2017, driven D 5 automobiles under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.128% on the front of the gas station located in C (SP) C in C (SP).

B. On June 23, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition to revoke the driver’s license (Class I common) pursuant to Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on September 12, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 4, 18 evidence, Eul 1 to 13 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff had no record of driving under the influence of alcohol or traffic accidents for nine (9) years since the acquisition of the driver's license, the blood alcohol concentration level of 0.128% significantly exceeded the revocation standards, and is currently serving as an intern employee belonging to the guest room E's operating team of large-name E. Since the license is revoked because the plaintiff frequently attends education to other businesses in other areas, it is de facto in case the license is revoked. In light of all the circumstances, the disposition in this case is not against the principle of public interest, but against the principle of profit bridge, and thus, the disadvantage suffered by the plaintiff is too much so excessive that the disposition in this case goes against the principle of discretionary power.

B. Determination 1 whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms 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 disposition, by objectively examining the content of the offense as the grounds for the disposition, the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all relevant circumstances.

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