▲ The above photo is not related to the content of the article.


A driver in his 50s who was arrested in the first trial after confessing to the police after drinking 9 glasses of soju and driving under the influence was acquitted in the appeals trial.



The Incheon District Court's Criminal Investigation Division 4 (Chief Judge Kim Yong-joong) announced today (3rd) that it had overturned the original sentence of one year in prison for A (58) charged with drunk driving under the Road Traffic Act and acquitted him.



Person A was charged with driving a vehicle about 5 meters while drinking alcohol on a road in Bucheon-si, Gyeonggi-do around 10 pm on April 27 last year.



He drank and drove for over an hour at the time, crashed into another vehicle parked in the street, but fled before police arrived and avoided a breathalyzer test.



Then, 12 days after the accident, he appeared at the police station and admitted to drinking.



During the police investigation, Mr. A said, "I drank alcohol before driving," and poured soju into a glass 9 times.



The amount of soju he claimed to drink was 250 ml, less than a bottle (360 ml).



Based on the amount of soju stated by Mr. A and his weight (66.3 kg), the police concluded that his blood alcohol level at the time of driving was 0.04%, which is the license suspension level, according to the 'widmark' formula.



The Widmark formula is an investigative technique that inversely estimates the blood alcohol concentration over time, taking into account the concentration of alcohol consumed, the amount of alcohol consumed, weight, and gender.



The court of first instance also found the prosecution's charges guilty and sentenced A to prison, and then arrested him in court.



He had a history of drunk driving several times in the past and was sentenced to eight months in prison in 2018.



Then, Mr. A appealed, saying, "Even though it was impossible to determine that the blood alcohol level at the time of driving was 0.04%, the original judgment misunderstood the facts and misunderstood the law."



Person A claimed that even at the time of the first trial, "it did not exceed the punishment standard of 0.03%."



The appellate court accepted Mr. A's claim, saying that the amount of alcohol consumed at the time of the defendant's driving was not accurate and that the blood alcohol level was also calculated incorrectly by the investigative agency.



The court of appeals said, "The amount of alcohol consumed by the accused 250ml was estimated 10 days after the incident, based on the defendant's statements, etc."



"The blood alcohol concentration of 0.04% calculated by the investigation agency did not reflect the decrease due to the amount of alcohol breakdown from the time the defendant started drinking until the time of driving," he said. It is lower than the number subject to punishment.”

Keywords: