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 July 8, 2017, at around 01:13, the Plaintiff driven C Rabage with a blood alcohol level of 0.123% at the front of Mapo-gu Seoul, Seoul (hereinafter “instant drunk driving”).

B. On July 17, 2017, 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 August 14, 2017, but was dismissed on October 17, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff moved his substitute article to ordinary places after drinking alcohol; (b) the Plaintiff had been driving at the heart after drinking less than a considerable time; (c) the Plaintiff’s drinking level was lower at the time of crackdown; and (c) the Plaintiff’s driving of the vehicle is essential for the Plaintiff’s occupation (such as real estate intermediary) and the Plaintiff’s family’s livelihood (including the progress of the individual rehabilitation procedure) when the instant disposition became final, taking into account the following: (a) the instant disposition 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 discretion 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 ground for 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 inside the administrative agency.