Admitted Drinking at the Time of Detection... "Was Not Intoxicated"
Court: "Drunk Driving Is Clear but No Evidence of Alcohol Level, Not Guilty"
A man in his 50s who was caught drinking and driving by the police and then drank more alcohol inside his car was tried on charges of drunk driving but was acquitted in the second trial due to insufficient evidence, following the first trial’s not guilty verdict.
On the 24th, the Criminal Appeals Division 2 of the Daejeon District Court (Presiding Judge Choi Hyung-cheol) acquitted Mr. A (56), who was tried on drunk driving charges, citing insufficient evidence. The prosecution, dissatisfied with the second trial’s ruling, filed an appeal to the Supreme Court for a final judgment.
Earlier, Mr. A was accused of driving a car for about 2.7 km on a road in Hongseong-gun, Chungnam, on the night of April 13, 2021, at around 9:41 p.m., with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.03% or higher. At the time of being caught, Mr. A admitted to drinking and driving but claimed that he was not intoxicated enough to be considered drunk driving under the Road Traffic Act.
He argued that within just 15 seconds after encountering the police and before getting out of the car, he drank two more cans of beer in the car, saying, "Since I got caught, I might as well drink," and that his blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving did not exceed the legal limit.
Accordingly, the prosecution viewed that Mr. A’s alcohol level exceeded 0.04% while driving and brought him to trial. However, the first trial court accepted Mr. A’s claim and acquitted him.
The first trial court stated, "Based on the evidence submitted by the prosecution, it appears clear that the defendant drove while intoxicated," but pointed out, "The amount of alcohol is an estimate based on the defendant’s statement, and there is no other data to guarantee its accuracy."
It further explained, "If the defendant drank two cans of beer after stopping the car as he claimed, applying the alcohol measurement formula favorably results in a blood alcohol concentration of 0.024% at the time of driving," adding, "Moreover, even if the calculated figure slightly exceeds the punishment standard, more cautious judgment is required in recognizing the elements of the crime," as the reason for the not guilty verdict.
The prosecution appealed, arguing that even if Mr. A drank more alcohol in the car, his blood alcohol concentration exceeded the punishment standard at the time of driving. However, the second trial court also dismissed this, stating, "It is clear that there were empty beer cans in the car at the time, so it is difficult to conclude that the statement about drinking after parking is false." The prosecution has filed an appeal to the Supreme Court, dissatisfied with the second trial’s ruling as well.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
