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 May 11, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking a driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol of the blood alcohol concentration of 0.126% on April 7, 2019, driven B car on the front of a cafeteria located in Yangsan City, to the front of the same city’s hotel ( approximately 600 meters) in front of the same city’s hotel located in Yangsan City.”

B. On May 21, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission. However, on July 16, 2019, the Plaintiff rendered a final judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s request.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 4 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion constitutes a deviation or abuse of discretionary authority when considering the fact that the Plaintiff did not have a long-term driving or traffic accident, that is a simple drinking driver who did not cause an accident, that is short of the distance of movement, that requires a driver’s license in occupation, and that his family’s livelihood, etc.

B. (1) Determination is that the public interest needs to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, because of frequent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving today's frequent and severe results, and the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking driving is more severe than the case of general beneficial administrative acts, unlike the case of general beneficial administrative acts, the general preventive aspect that should prevent drinking driving rather than the disadvantage of the party due to the revocation should be emphasized. The Plaintiff's driving level constitutes the criteria for revocation of a driver's license under Article 91 (1) [Attachment Table 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, with the degree of the Plaintiff's driving level 0.126% of blood alcohol concentration.

(2) In addition, the inevitable circumstances in which the Plaintiff had no choice but to drive under the influence of alcohol do not peep, the blood alcohol concentration, and the revocation of a driver's license are able to obtain a license again after the lapse of a certain period, and the effect of sanctions is limited to a limited period.