[Jinju Criminal Case Attorney Assistance] Establishing That the Evidence of the Drunk Driving Charge Was Insufficient and Securing a Non-Referral

After finishing work, the client went to a restaurant to have dinner with an acquaintance.

The client parked near the restaurant, went inside, and began talking with the acquaintance.

He had only lightly touched soju to his lips and had not drunk even half a glass when he received a request to move his car.

The client got into a dispute with the other party over a parking issue.

When the other party said he would report the matter to the police, the client told him to do as he pleased, then went back inside and drank.

However, the other party had reported the client not for the parking issue but for drunk driving.

Thirty minutes after the client had started drinking, the police arrived and conducted a breathalyzer test, leaving the client in a deeply unfair situation.

He came to the Jinju criminal case attorney to seek assistance.

■ Drunk Driving

▶ Where a single instance of drunk driving is detected and it is a repeat offense within 10 years

Where a person who has been sentenced to a fine or a heavier penalty for drunk driving commits drunk driving again within 10 years from the date the sentence became final (including a person whose sentence has lapsed), that person is punished according to the following subparagraphs.

▶ Article 44 (Prohibition of Driving While Intoxicated)

The standard for the intoxicated state in which driving is prohibited is a driver's blood alcohol concentration of 0.03 percent or higher.

▶ Article 148-2 (Penal Provisions)

Blood alcohol concentration of 0.2 percent or higher

Imprisonment for not less than 2 years and not more than 6 years, or a fine of not less than 10 million won and not more than 30 million won

Blood alcohol concentration of 0.03 percent or higher but lower than 0.2 percent

Imprisonment for not less than 1 year and not more than 5 years, or a fine of not less than 5 million won and not more than 20 million won

▶ The Jinju criminal case attorney emphasized that, as seen in the dashcam footage, the client's behavior and gait appeared entirely normal for someone who was not under the influence of alcohol.

▶ The Jinju criminal case attorney emphasized that, because there was a time gap of about 1 hour between the moment of the breathalyzer test and the moment of driving, the blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving was likely lower than that measured at the time of the test.

▶ The Jinju criminal case attorney emphasized that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor was not sufficient to establish that, at the time of driving, the client was in an intoxicated state with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.05% or higher, the statutory threshold.

If, like the situation above, you have been unfairly implicated in a drunk driving offense and need the help of an experienced attorney, you may turn to the Jinju criminal case attorney at any time.

Drawing on a range of resolved cases and extensive experience handling drunk driving matters, we will actively assist with your case.