Gangneung Attorney Recommendation | Helping a Drunk Driving Client, the Prosecutor's Appeal Is Dismissed and the Original Judgment Is Upheld

The reason the prosecutor appealed the case of the client who came to the Gangneung attorney was that the sentence was light relative to the gravity of the offense.

At the time of the offense in this case, the client's blood alcohol concentration was relatively high, and he had a prior record of being punished for drunk driving 5 years earlier.

Repeat drunk driving system: a 🔗drunk driving punishment system that more heavily punishes a person who commits drunk driving within 10 years.

The starting point for this system is not the date the drunk driving was caught but the date on which a sentence of a fine or greater for drunk driving became final.

Because 10 years had not elapsed since the client had a fine confirmed by summary order, he was in a situation where this system could apply and aggravated punishment could be imposed.

-0.2 or higher: imprisonment of 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

-0.03 or higher and less than 0.2: imprisonment of 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 attorney argued that the client was recently defrauded in an investment scheme and was facing severe financial hardship.

The client lost his entire fortune to the fraud, his home was facing auction, and he was getting by day to day after filing for individual rehabilitation.

The client had abstained from alcohol after a prior drunk driving conviction, but under these circumstances drinking was the only way he could relieve his stress.

The client is currently supporting his elderly mother on his own.

The attorney emphasized that if the client were to receive a criminal penalty heavier than the fine imposed at first instance, not only the client but also his mother would fall into deep financial destitution.

The attorney argued that, although the client admitted the offense and showed deep remorse, the distance he drove under the influence was very short.

On the day of the incident, the client had been drinking with a victim who had been defrauded in the same scheme.

The client took the wheel because a resident called and asked him to move the car.

As he made one loop around the parking lot, a resident reported the swerving vehicle, and the drunk driving was detected.

The attorney emphasized that, while taking the wheel was a serious mistake, the client drove only a very short distance under unavoidable circumstances.