Confirmed Prison Sentence for Causing Fatal Accident by Forcing Unlicensed Part-Time Worker to Drink and Drive

"My Son Has Been Taught to Drive Since He Was 5"... Supreme Court Rejects Appeal

[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] A man in his 40s who caused a fatal accident by making an underage part-time worker without a license drive under the influence has been sentenced to a heavy punishment.

On the 19th, the Supreme Court Division 1 (Presiding Justice Park Jeonghwa) confirmed the original ruling that found Mr. A, in his 40s, guilty in the appeal trial on charges including violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes (dangerous driving causing death). The original ruling sentencing Mr. B, a minor charged with the same offense, to 1 year and 6 months in prison as the long-term sentence and 1 year as the short-term sentence was also upheld.

Mr. A, a chef, was on trial for allegedly making Mr. B, a teenager working part-time at the same restaurant, drive under the influence without a license after drinking together. It was investigated that Mr. A handed the car keys to the intoxicated Mr. B, saying, "My son has been taught to drive since he was five years old. You can drive too," thereby requesting him to drive under the influence without a license.

While driving Mr. A’s car, Mr. B crossed the central divider and collided head-on with an oncoming passenger car. Two occupants of the other car died, and two others were seriously injured in the accident. At the time of the accident, Mr. B’s blood alcohol concentration was 0.131%, which is above the license cancellation level.

The first trial sentenced Mr. A to 3 years and 6 months in prison, and the minor Mr. B to 1 year and 6 months as the long-term sentence and 1 year as the short-term sentence.

The court judged that Mr. A instigated the illegal act by repeatedly encouraging Mr. B to drive under the influence, knowing that he did not have a driver’s license and was intoxicated. The court also cited as sentencing reasons that Mr. A, as an adult, neglected his duty to protect the minor, did not reach a settlement with the victims, and had a history of two prior punishments for drunk driving.

The court stated, "Mr. A even transmitted the habit of drunk driving to the minor Mr. B. Although the primary responsibility for the traffic accident lies with the driver Mr. B, considering the circumstances leading to the result, severe punishment for Mr. A is inevitable."

The second trial dismissed the appeals of Mr. A and Mr. B. They filed an appeal, but the Supreme Court also dismissed it, stating, "There is no error in the original ruling."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.