1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. (i) On May 29, 2017, the Plaintiff driven approximately 200 meters on the road front of the Han River of 1534 Godong-dong-dong-dong 1534, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.137% of blood alcohol concentration around May 29, 2017.

B. On June 8, 2017, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition to the Plaintiff, which revoked the driver’s license (Class II common) based on Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act.

On June 22, 2017, the Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the said request on August 31, 2017.

【Facts without dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap’s evidence 1, 2, Eul’s evidence 4 through 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In full view of the following: (i) the instant disposition is lawful; (ii) the Plaintiff is merely a simple drunk driving without any personal or material injury; (iii) there is no traffic accident or force of drunk driving for about five years; (iv) active cooperation with the investigation agency; and (v) the Plaintiff actively provides support for the family members who open dental clinics and make it difficult for the dental clinic by unduly obtaining a loan from the investigation agency; and (iv) the instant disposition is unlawful and void.

According to Article 93(1)1 of the Luxembourg Road Traffic Act and Article 91(1)28 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, the time when a person drives under the influence of alcohol (not less than 0.1% of blood alcohol concentration) shall be determined based on the revocation of the license, and the disposal penalty points may be mitigated to 110 points for “a person who is an important means to maintain his family’s livelihood or is engaged in transportation service for not less than three years at the time of the disposition as an exemplary driver, or who has received an official commendation from the chief of a police station or higher by causing a traffic accident and arresting an escape driver and does not meet the specified exclusion requirements.” One of the requirements for the exclusion of mitigation, the blood alcohol concentration exceeds 0.12%.