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 18, 2019, at around 00:52, the Plaintiff driven a B-to-pubed passenger vehicle with a 0.105% alcohol level, while under the influence of alcohol, and 1 km from Seocheon-si C to Seocheon-si D, respectively.

B. On August 8, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking the first-class ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of at least 0.08%, which is the base value for revocation of the license (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on October 1, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1 to 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The summary of the plaintiff's assertion is relatively short of the distance from which the plaintiff did not cause any personal or material damage due to the plaintiff's drinking driving, and driving of alcohol is relatively short, since the plaintiff acquired the plaintiff's driver's license, the plaintiff did not cause traffic accidents or drive under influence for about 13 years, and the plaintiff is currently in the business division that supplies materials to the construction site as its members, and the plaintiff is in the business division that supplies materials to the construction site. The construction site is the main business. The construction of sampling and the supply and demand of materials are the main business for technical assistance, and the license is revoked because the license should be conducted on the site by operating a vehicle with an average of 5,00 km meters per month, it is impossible to perform its duties, and it is necessary for the plaintiff to support his spouse and children, and the plaintiff should also repay his debts. In light of the above, the disposition of this case is revoked because it is an abuse of discretionary power by excessively harshly abusing the plaintiff.

B. The issue of whether a punitive administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion by social norms is the ground for the disposition.