1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On May 13, 2016, the Defendant issued the instant disposition that revoked the Plaintiff’s Class II ordinary car driver’s license (license number: E) as of June 26, 2016, by applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act on May 27, 2016, on the ground that the Plaintiff driven a d bargaining car on the front side of the C Pharmacy located in Ansan-si B while under the influence of alcohol content of 0.14%.

[Ground of recognition] No dispute, entry in Eul 4 through 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff alleged that the vehicle beyond the central line was exposed to alcohol driving on the wind, when the vehicle that was traveling across the central line while waiting for a substitute engineer after drinking so that it could get off the vehicle.

In addition to the above circumstances of drunk driving, the Plaintiff had been engaged in exemplary driving for 16 years since the Plaintiff acquired the driver’s license. The Plaintiff’s license was unlawful since it constitutes an abuse of discretion because it constitutes a case where the Plaintiff abused too harsh discretion because it constitutes an abuse of discretion because it constitutes a case where it constitutes an abuse of discretion by the Plaintiff, considering the following: (a) the Plaintiff did not have any particular expertise except driving due to a high school academic career, and has been working in the logistics center and is in need of a driver’s license to commute to and from the long

B. Even if the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking driving is an administrative agency's discretionary act, in light of today's mass means of transportation and the situation where a driver's license is issued in large quantities, the increase of traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, and the cruelness of the result, the need for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving should be emphasized, and the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking driving on the ground of revocation of ordinary beneficial administrative act is different from the revocation of such revocation.