The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 9, 2020, at around 03:00 on May 9, 2020, the Plaintiff driven C vehicle while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.098% in front of the city of leisure (hereinafter “instant drinking”).

B. On May 27, 2020, 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, but was dismissed on August 11, 2020.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap’s 1 through 3, 7, Eul’s 1, 2, and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. In light of all circumstances, the Plaintiff’s assertion actively cooperated in the investigation of drunk driving after the pertinent drunk driving, the distance of drunk driving remains relatively short, the 16-year accidentless experience, the use of usual driving by proxy, and the Plaintiff’s use of his/her occupational vehicle as an external business trip due to a large number of external business trips in the electricity of the chemical production plant, the need for the operation of his/her occupational vehicle is suffering from economic difficulties, and there are family members to support the instant disposition, the instant disposition exceeded the scope of discretion or abused discretionary power.

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 it has no effect to guarantee citizens or courts externally.