Attempt to "Drive While Intoxicated" Results in 7-Year Sentence in Appeal…Court: "No Genuine Remorse Shown"

A driver in his 50s, who took the life of a teenage youth in a drunk driving accident, has appealed to the Supreme Court after a heavier sentence was imposed in the appellate court. It was revealed that the defendant was speeding at 159 km/h at the time of the accident and even attempted to use the so-called "Drive While Intoxicated" method to avoid a breathalyzer test by consuming alcohol at a hospital.

According to the legal community on the 24th, the attorney for A (51), who was indicted on charges of fatal traffic violations under the Special Act on Traffic Accidents, submitted an appeal to the court on the 22nd, contesting the appellate court's decision.

A was driving a Porsche Panamera at 159 km/h when he collided with a stopped Chevrolet Spark vehicle at a crossroad in Deokjin-gu, Jeonju, North Jeolla Province, last June, resulting in the death of 19-year-old B. B was returning home after completing driving practice, and a friend of the same age who was with him also sustained serious injuries to his head and body.

Appellate Court: "Evasion of Responsibility Rather than Remorse" … Heavier Sentence Imposed

A appealed after being sentenced to 6 years in prison in the first trial, claiming the sentence was excessive; however, during the appellate court proceedings on the 21st, the sentence was increased to 7 years.

The appellate court stated, "The defendant said in the first trial, 'I will live my life in regret,' but in the appellate court, he denied driving under the influence and emphasized his financial burden. Such circumstances are merely responsibilities he must bear, showing no sincere remorse."

The court also criticized, "The defendant has a similar criminal record in the past and was under a suspended sentence at that time. Nevertheless, he drove at high speeds while intoxicated, leading to an accident. Even after the accident, he continued to attempt evasion of responsibility."

Attempt to Conceal Alcohol Consumption through "Drive While Intoxicated" … Police Didn’t Conduct Breathalyzer Test

Immediately after the accident, A told the police, "I will undergo a blood test," leading them to rely on that statement and transport him by ambulance to the hospital without conducting a breathalyzer test. Once in the hospital's emergency room, A left to buy and consume alcohol at a nearby convenience store, attempting to cover up his drunk driving through the so-called "Drive While Intoxicated" method.

When the police checked A's alcohol consumption about two hours later, he had already consumed additional alcohol. Consequently, the blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving was not accurately measured, resulting in only the minimal value of 0.036% derived from the Widmark formula being applied.

Public Awareness Raised by Family Petition … Supreme Court's Decision Anticipated

This case gained public attention following appeals from the victim's family. In September of last year, the families submitted a petition for reconsideration on the National Assembly's public consent petition board, which garnered over 50,000 votes, meeting the requirements for legislative review.

The first trial court considered that A had reached a settlement and paid some damages to the victim's family in imposing a 6-year sentence. However, it determined that "the claim of not knowing that the victim had died or that he drank alcohol out of frustration over vehicle damage is seen as evasion of responsibility."

It remains uncertain what decision the Supreme Court will make, but this case, in which legal treatment was mitigated despite avoiding a breathalyzer test, is drawing attention as a point of sharp conflict between public sentiment and legal interpretation.

Image source: Reference material for understanding the article / gettyimagesbank