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 October 21, 2017, at around 01:00, the Plaintiff driven D-motor vehicles from the upper end of C in the Ilyang-si, U.S., Goyang-si, Goyang-si, with a level of 0.121% alcohol level around 01:0 to the upper end of the light under the influence of alcohol level.

B. Accordingly, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking a driver’s license (class 1 ordinary) against the Plaintiff on the date stated in the purport of the claim (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal within a legitimate period, but was dismissed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 5 through 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion did not cause any personal and material damage due to the instant driving, the inevitable nature of the Plaintiff’s vocational driving, the circumstances leading to the Plaintiff’s drunk driving, the Plaintiff’s violation of the laws and regulations, and the fact that the Plaintiff has driven a vehicle for a long time, the instant disposition is unlawful as it deviates from and abused discretion.

B. Whether a punitive administrative disposition deviates from or abused the scope of discretion under the social norms ought to be determined by objectively examining the substance of the offense, which is the grounds for the disposition, and the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and all the circumstances complying with such disposition, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Du11779, Apr. 7, 200) by comparing and balancing the degree of infringement on the public interest and the disadvantages that an individual would incur (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Du11779, Apr. 7, 200). In a case where the Presidential Decree or Ministerial Ordinance provides the disposition standards, the disposition standards per se do not conform to the Constitution or laws, or are considerably unfair in light of the content and purport of the relevant laws and regulations.