CONTENTS
- 1. The Client Who Requested Resolution of the Traffic Accident Dispute
- - The Client's Charges
- 2. How to Respond to a Traffic Accident Dispute
- - Explanation of the Concept of the Widmark Formula
- 3. The Specialized Attorney Who Set Out to Resolve the Traffic Accident Dispute
- - Confirming Whether Comprehensive Insurance Was Obtained
- - Denying the Drinking
- 4. Traffic Accident Dispute Outcome
1. The Client Who Requested Resolution of the Traffic Accident Dispute
This is the account of a client who requested help in resolving a traffic accident dispute.
The client states that, while driving on the day of the incident, the client failed to check the rear when changing lanes and struck the victim's vehicle.
As a result, the victim sustained injuries, including a cervical sprain and strain, requiring about two weeks of treatment.
After the accident, the client immediately got out of the vehicle and went toward the victim's vehicle to check on the victim's condition.
The victim abruptly asked the client whether the client had been drinking and pressed the client about how much the client had drunk.
Flustered by the first traffic accident the client had ever caused, the client states that the client mistakenly said, in response to the victim's leading question, that the client had drunk one and a half bottles of soju.
The client gave the victim a business card and left the scene after asking the victim to make contact so that the matter could be handled through insurance.
Afterward, the victim continued to send the client threatening messages and demanded an excessive settlement amount.
When the client refused, the victim filed a criminal complaint against the client for drunk driving and causing injury in a traffic accident, and this traffic accident dispute arose.
The Client's Charges
The charges against the client, who sought resolution of a traffic accident dispute, were as follows.
As a person engaged in the business of driving, the client had an occupational duty of care to change lanes safely after confirming the safety of the lane when changing lanes to secure space.
However, the client neglected this and changed lanes without due care, and through this negligence caused injury to the victim, who happened to be traveling straight ahead using the lane into which the client had changed.
The client was also charged with driving in an intoxicated state with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.099% as calculated by the Widmark formula on the day of the incident.
Following the above charges, a traffic accident dispute arose, and in addition the client came to face the risk of punishment.
2. How to Respond to a Traffic Accident Dispute
Under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, except in cases such as where the victim's injury causes a danger to life, if the vehicle that caused the traffic accident is covered by insurance, no public prosecution may be instituted even though the traffic accident caused bodily injury to a person.
Therefore, to prevent disputes over traffic accidents, it is advisable to subscribe to comprehensive traffic accident insurance in advance.
However, where the case falls under one of the 12 categories of gross negligence under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, public prosecution may be instituted even if insurance has been subscribed.
Driving without a license and drunk driving are also among the 12 categories of gross negligence, so if you are facing charges involving one of these 12 categories, in particular driving without a license or a drunk driving traffic accident, you should seek the assistance of an attorney with relevant experience in order to prepare a strategy to respond to punishment.
Explanation of the Concept of the Widmark Formula
In this case, the client, following the victim's leading questions, stated that he had drunk a bottle and a half of soju, and so under the Widmark formula he was charged with having driven in an intoxicated state with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.99%.
The Widmark formula is a formula used when a considerable amount of time has passed after drunk driving and the blood alcohol concentration at the time of the incident cannot be measured.
The Widmark formula is as follows.
C = the estimated blood alcohol concentration when t hours have passed since the last drink
A÷(10PR) = the peak value (%) among the blood alcohol concentrations of the person who drank
A = the mass of alcohol consumed by the person who drank (g, = amount of drink (ml) X (alcohol content of the drink (%)÷100) X specific gravity of alcohol (0.7894g/ml))
P = the body weight of the person who drank (kg)
R = the sex coefficient of the person who drank (male = 0.86, female = 0.64)
β = the hourly decrease in blood alcohol concentration (on average 0.015 %/h)
t = elapsed time (unit: h)
3. The Specialized Attorney Who Set Out to Resolve the Traffic Accident Dispute
To resolve the traffic accident dispute, this firm's specialist attorney took the following steps.
Confirming Whether Comprehensive Insurance Was Obtained
The specialized attorney first checked whether the client, who was involved in the traffic accident dispute, had subscribed to comprehensive insurance.
The client had subscribed to comprehensive insurance, and the specialized attorney submitted the comprehensive insurance subscription statement and emphasized that the charge of causing injury in a traffic accident could not be applied to the client.
Because the victim in this case sustained only a minor injury requiring just 2 weeks of treatment, the attorney asserted that, under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, prosecution could not be instituted against the client.
Denying the Drinking
The attorney fully denied the fact of the client's drinking, emphasizing that the client had not undergone a sobriety test on the day of the incident and that the drunk driving allegation had been applied to the client based solely on the victim's statement.
The client had had about one or two glasses of soju the day before the incident, but he had not consumed any alcohol at all on the day of the incident.
Immediately after the incident, however, he fell for the victim's leading questions, which pressed him, and mistakenly said that he had been drinking.
The attorney emphasized that the client had drunk only a very small amount the day before the incident, and that it could not be concluded, based solely on the victim's statement, that the client's blood alcohol level had been 0.099%.
4. Traffic Accident Dispute Outcome
After the attorney specializing in traffic accidents took on resolving the traffic accident dispute, the prosecution issued a non-prosecution disposition for the client.
The prosecution explained the grounds for non-prosecution, stating that for the charge of injury from a traffic accident there was no right to prosecute because the client had subscribed to comprehensive insurance, and for the drunk driving charge there was no suspicion because the evidence was insufficient.
The client had faced the risk of an excessive settlement amount and criminal punishment due to the traffic accident dispute, but with the assistance of the attorney, the case could be concluded at the prosecution stage.
If you become involved in a traffic accident dispute like the client in this case and turn to our firm, a traffic accident attorney and a criminal attorney will cooperate to prepare a strategy tailored to the case.
If you need assistance in resolving a traffic accident dispute, please consider making a 🔗legal consultation reservation.
This content is based on actual case studies of Daeryun Law LLC with some adaptations, and the copyright belongs to our firm.
Unauthorized reproduction, duplication, or distribution and other copyright infringements may result in legal action under applicable laws.
