Deals & Cases

Refusal of a Breathalyzer Test
Refusal of a Breathalyzer TestSuspended Sentence

Punishment for Refusal of a Breathalyzer Test | Client Facing Punishment for Refusing a Breathalyzer Test, Custodial Sentence Successfully Avoided

This is the account of a client who sought the assistance of an attorney, facing punishment for refusal of a breathalyzer test. The client faced punishment for failing to comply with the police's request for a breathalyzer test, and the attorney avoided a custodial sentence.

1. Client Facing Punishment for Refusal of a Breathalyzer Test

This is the account of a client who sought an attorney, facing punishment for refusal of a breathalyzer test.

The client was on the way to a meeting place, excited at the thought of meeting a partner for a date after work,

when a supervisor from work suddenly called and insisted that the client come to a company dinner.

The client, facing punishment for refusal of a breathalyzer test, had no choice but to give up the date and attend the company dinner.

The client explained that, although they did not want to drink because of medication they were regularly taking, they ended up drinking about two glasses of beer out of deference to the supervisor.

After the company dinner ended, the client wanted to see the partner even briefly, and because the dinner venue and the partner's home were close, the client drove the vehicle.

While driving, the client could not properly keep watch on the road ahead in the rain that had begun to pour, and ultimately struck a guardrail.

Afterward, the police were dispatched to handle the accident and requested a breathalyzer test of the client.

The client, facing punishment for refusal of a breathalyzer test, explained that, fearing that even two glasses of beer might register an alcohol reading, the client committed the offense of refusing the breathalyzer test.

2. The Level of Punishment for Refusal of a Breathalyzer Test

Punishment for Refusal of a Breathalyzer Test

This is the account of a client who sought an attorney, facing punishment for refusal of a breathalyzer test.

Under the Road Traffic Act, a police officer may conduct a breathalyzer test if there are reasonable grounds to find that a person has driven under the influence.

Article 44 of the Road Traffic Act (Prohibition of Driving While Intoxicated)

(1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle, etc., a tram, or a bicycle while intoxicated.
(2) If it is deemed necessary for traffic safety and the prevention of danger, or where there are reasonable grounds to find that a person has driven a motor vehicle, etc., a tram, or a bicycle while intoxicated in violation of paragraph (1), a police officer may measure by a breath test whether the driver is intoxicated. In such cases, the driver shall comply with the police officer's measurement.

A person who refuses a police officer's breathalyzer test is punishable under the Road Traffic Act at the following level.

Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act (Penal Provisions)

(2) A person for whom there are reasonable grounds to find that the person is intoxicated and who does not comply with a police officer's measurement under Article 44 (2) shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year but not more than five years, or a fine of not less than five million won but not more than twenty million won.

3. The Defense of the Client Facing Punishment for Refusal of a Breathalyzer Test

For the client facing punishment for refusal of a breathalyzer test, the attorney conducted the defense as follows.

Client Facing Punishment for Refusal of a Breathalyzer Test: “The Client Was Not in an Intoxicated State”

The attorney emphasized that the client facing punishment for refusal of a breathalyzer test was not in an intoxicated state at the time of the offense.

The client had drunk about two glasses of beer, and because the driving took place roughly one hour after drinking, it can be inferred that, taking the rate of alcohol metabolism into account, the client was likely not in an intoxicated state.

As for the point regarding refusal of the breathalyzer test, the client fully admits the offense and shows remorse.

Client Facing Punishment for Refusal of a Breathalyzer Test: “There Are Favorable Mitigating Factors”

The attorney emphasized that the client facing punishment for refusal of a breathalyzer test had favorable mitigating factors under the sentencing guidelines.

Under the sentencing guidelines, in cases of drunk driving or driving without a license, factors such as a very low risk to road traffic from the driving, clear social ties, and the defendant's detention entailing excessive hardship for dependents are cited as favorable mitigating factors.

The client supports an elderly mother, so the client's detention would entail excessive hardship for the elderly mother.

On this basis, the attorney requested leniency in the form of a suspended sentence, as the client falls under all of the favorable mitigating factors above.

4. Judgment for a Client Facing Punishment for Refusing a Breathalyzer Test

After reviewing the attorney's argument, the court issued a suspended sentence to the client, who faced punishment for refusing a breathalyzer test.

The client had driven under the influence and then refused the breathalyzer test, so an actual custodial sentence appeared unavoidable.

With the attorney's assistance, the client was able to avoid an actual custodial sentence and receive a suspended sentence instead.

If, like this client, you face punishment for refusing a breathalyzer test, please feel free to request an 🔗attorney referral and entrust your case to us.

음주측정거부처벌 | 음주측정거부해 처벌 위기 의뢰인, 실형 방어 성공

This content is based on actual cases handled by Daeryun Law LLC and has been partially adapted. All copyrights belong to Daeryun Law LLC.
Unauthorized reproduction, copying or distribution may result in legal action under applicable laws.

Refusal of a Breathalyzer Test: Want a faster, more detailed consultation?

Consult a
specialized attorney

Related Information

Explore legal information related to this case.

Explore more legal information

Daeryun's Key Strengths

Daeryun's key strengths background
Litigation strategy using
Daeryun's own AI & IT technology

Litigation strategy using Daeryun's own AI & IT technology

More than 240
key members

More than 240 key members

*experience_cnt*+ cases handled
per month

1,200+ cases handled per month

* 2025년 월평균 기준
Complies with Korean Bar Association Advertising Regulations Article 4 (1)

Explore
more strengths
Explore more strengths arrow

Book a legal
consultation with an attorney

All consultations are reviewed by a specialized attorney first,
so they are conducted by appointment only.

Phone consultation

1800-7905

Available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year

Phone consultation
Online consultation

Online consultation

We provide tailored
legal services for our clients.

Chat consultation

Chat consultation

KakaoTalk channel
Daeryun Law LLC Attorneys

Request a consultation

Related Members

View more
Attorney EunYoung Kim

EunYoung Kim

T. 070-5117-2950

Prosecutor experience at Seoul Southern District Prosecutors’ Office and Uijeongbu District Prosecutors’ Office

Attorney Hyo Chul JEON

Hyo Chul JEON

T. 070-5221-2387

Traffic accident lawyer

Attorney HyunKyung KEUM

HyunKyung KEUM

T. 070-7510-1822

Attorney specializing in drunk driving

Attorney SungAh KIM

SungAh KIM

T. 070-5214-2362

Attorney specializing in drunk driving

Key Case Studies

View more

Related Practice Areas

View more
View our Case Handling System

Consult in other languages

Popular Columns

View more

Previous

Seosan Law Firm Assistance | Protecting the Safety of a Victim of an Unfair Contract by Providing Security Services

Next

Daegu Criminal Attorney | Representing a Special Intimidation Victim in Filing a Complaint and Securing the Offender's Conviction

View list
Quick Menu

Chat