1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. (i) On April 11, 2018, under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol content of 0.136% at around 23:50, the Plaintiff driven a B radar car from the Southern East-si square of Masung-si to Samsung 1, Samsung 1, and 46, from the Southern-si square of Masung-si to the road front of the towing test distance.

B. On April 23, 2018, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition to the Plaintiff on the grounds of Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act, which revoked the driver’s license (Class I common).

Article 22(1) of the former Administrative Appeals Commission Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2010, Jul. 3, 2018; Presidential Decree No. 2420, Jul. 3, 2018)

【Facts without dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap’s evidence 1, 2, Eul’s evidence 4 through 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserts that the instant disposition is unlawful since it abused discretion, considering the following as a whole: (i) whether it is legitimate of the instant disposition; (ii) the Plaintiff is merely a simple drinking without an accident; (iii) the usual meeting uses a substitute driving; (iv) the investigation of the instant case; and (v) the representative director of a small-scale company established in the year, who is in fact responsible for the business, and thus requires a driver’s license for family life.

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%.