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 August 10, 2020, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.179% during blood at around 21:45, 2020, 200 meters, 300 meters, driving from the front and front roads of the E secondary school in the city of Shiscopic, and 300 meters from the front and front roads of Escopic in the city of Shiscopic. On the other hand, the Plaintiff scopic vehicle in the signal waiting, scop back from behind the signal waiting vehicle, and scop back the above signal waiting vehicle in the future, and scop back the said vehicle in the signal waiting, suffered injury for about two weeks, respectively.

B. On August 27, 2020, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking Class 1 and Class 1 ordinary driver’s license against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff had injured a person due to a traffic accident while driving a alcohol (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(c)

The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal against the instant disposition, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s administrative appeal on October 20, 2020.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is relatively short of the distance from which the Plaintiff driven while drinking alcohol; the Plaintiff’s acquisition of a driver’s license that caused a traffic accident between about 18 years and there was no power to drive alcohol; and the Plaintiff is against the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff would not drive alcohol again.

C. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff operates a pumps-based shop, which is essential to drive due to the nature of the business, there is room for the Plaintiff to cease to perform its principal duties when the driver’s license is revoked, and the Plaintiff is obliged to support his spouse and two children, and to pay the loan principle, the instant disposition is too harsh to the Plaintiff, thereby abusing its discretion.