The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

A. On October 22, 2019, the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol with blood alcohol content of 0.134% on October 22, 2019, driven D-car on the road front of the C store located in Tonju-gun B (hereinafter “instant drunk driving”).

B. On December 5, 2019, the Plaintiff issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s first-class ordinary license on the ground of the instant drunk driving (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal on December 23, 2019, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s request for administrative appeal on February 11, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 13 recognized the plaintiff's assertion as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case, and it is against the plaintiff's wrong determination, and again, the plaintiff would not drive a drinking again. The plaintiff actively cooperate in the investigation, the plaintiff is driving a drinking or has no power to cause a traffic accident, the plaintiff was allowed to drive a drinking driving of this case because there is no available substitute driver, and the driving distance of this case is relatively short of 2 to 3 km, the plaintiff's driver's license is essential for commuting, and if the driver's license is revoked, the plaintiff is in a position where it is difficult to support his/her mother, as well as his/her livelihood with excessive debts, and it is unlawful because he/she has abused discretionary power.

The issue of whether the instant disposition exceeds the scope of discretion or abused discretion is whether the relevant legal doctrine or administrative disposition deviatess from or abused the scope of discretion under the social norms, shall be determined by the content of the offense as the grounds for the disposition, and the public interest to be achieved by the relevant disposition, and