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 14, 2017, the Plaintiff, while driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol 0.105% with a blood alcohol level, was discovered, and filed an administrative appeal on September 22, 2017 with the Defendant’s driver’s license revocation disposition.

On November 29, 2017, the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling that the revocation of the above driver's license should be changed to the suspension of the driver's license for 110 days.

As a result, the plaintiff was given 110 points with penalty points according to the Enforcement Rules of the Road Traffic Act.

B. On March 9, 2018, the Plaintiff was given a penalty of 15 points as it discovered a violation of the prohibition of use of mobile phones during driving.

C. On May 24, 2018, the Defendant issued a notice of revocation of the first and second class ordinary vehicle driver’s licenses to the Plaintiff on May 24, 2018 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s given points 125 points exceeds 121 points per year of the revocation standard point of the driver’s license.

The Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on August 14, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1, 2, Eul's 1, 4, and 7 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff is essential to drive a motor vehicle in order to purchase food materials by operating a restaurant, and without recognizing that there have already been 110 points, it was using a mobile phone while driving, and even though there are circumstances considering the circumstances, the disposition of this case which did not consider the above point is deemed to have been excessively harshly abused and abused discretion.

B. The issue of whether a punitive administrative disposition exceeds the scope of discretion under the social norms or abused discretionary power is intended to be achieved by the content of the offense alleged as the grounds for the disposition and by the pertinent disposition.