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 November 2, 2019, the Defendant issued a revocation of the driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff, while under the influence of alcohol around 23:30 on October 10, 2019, 0.11% of the blood alcohol level, was driven by approximately 2 km from the front side of the apartment at C apartment at the time of displaying B car to the front edge of the same city at the same time at the same time.”

B. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission on December 2, 2019, but a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim was rendered on January 14, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 7 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The instant disposition constitutes abuse of discretion when considering the short distance of the Plaintiff’s alleged driving, the fact that the Plaintiff’s driver’s license is essential as a radiation dose inspector, etc.

B. (1) Determination is highly necessary for the public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, because of the frequent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving today, and the results thereof are harsh, and when the driver's license is revoked on the ground of drinking driving, unlike the cancellation of the general beneficial administrative act, the general preventive aspect that should prevent drinking driving rather than the disadvantage of the party due to the cancellation should be more emphasized.

(2) In the instant case, the Plaintiff’s alcohol level is 0.11% of blood alcohol level, and the criteria for revocation of driver’s license under Article 91(1) [Attachment Table 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act (the blood alcohol level is 0.08% or more), the Plaintiff’s inevitable circumstances that the Plaintiff had no choice but to drive under the influence of alcohol do not peep, and the revocation of driver’s license is able to obtain a license again after the lapse of a certain period, and thus, the effect of sanctions is limited to a limited period.