"if you drink alcohol, you can't start the engine." frequent drunk drivers make preventive devices mandatory.

■ Host: Anchor Yoon Bori, Anchor Jung Ji-woong
■ Starring: Lawyer Seo Jeong-bin

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN Newswide] when quoting.

[Anchor]
Recently, there has been a lot of news about famous people driving under the influence of alcohol.

From now on, drunk driving prevention devices will be attached to vehicles of habitual drunk drivers. Along with the related contents, let's point out the major incident and lawyer Seo Jung-bin. Hello.

[Jeongbin Seo]
How are you?

[Anchor]
Recently, in the case of singer Kim Ho-joong and former President Moon's daughter Da-hye, haven't there been a lot of news about drunk driving by these famous people? In the meantime, actor Park Sang-min, known as the son of a general, is on trial for drunk driving, and he has already been caught for the third time. Please give me an overview of the case first.

[Jeongbin Seo]
As you said, Park Sang-min, who is currently on trial, is on trial on May 19 for drinking and driving his vehicle near his home. At that time, I think I fell asleep in an alley before returning home. A citizen who found this was caught drunk driving when he reported it to the police. And at that time, the blood alcohol concentration was confirmed to be 0.163%, the level of license cancellation. In fact, Park Sang-min has this history before. In 1997 and 2011, respectively, he was punished for drunk driving, so this is the third drunk driving to be included. And at the trial on the 25th, the prosecution demanded a six-month prison term and is set to be sentenced on November 13.

[Anchor]
a six-month prison sentence How is the sentence compared to the usual DUI punishment?

[Jeongbin Seo]
These days, there is a history of drunk driving punishment within 10 years called binary out, and if you drive drunk again, you will be punished further. In this case, punishment is usually stronger than normal drunk driving, but in the case of Park Sang-min, although he has a past history, the recent drunk driving is 10 years ago, so this binary out does not apply. However, the level of blood alcohol itself is high enough to be considered intoxicated, and since there have been two drunk driving experiences in the past, this will also be considered an unfavorable sentence. Considering those points, it is considered that 6 months was requested, and compared to other drunk driving cases, it can be seen as a normal sentence.

[Anchor]
Then, based on the various circumstances, do you think the judgment of the court will be decided at the level of six months?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, the prosecution asked for a six-month prison term, but there are many stories about whether this is habitual or not. In fact, if you look at cases, there are cases where people are caught drinking and driving under the influence during trials or investigations. In such a case, there is no problem even if it is considered habitual, but in the case of Park Sang-min, it is a little difficult to admit such habitual behavior. If so, the court carefully predicts that even if all past histories are considered, the sentence will be sentenced with a lighter level than the old one, that is, generally, a suspended sentence.

[Anchor]
Park Sang-min has been caught three times. I heard that there are quite a lot of recidivism in drunk driving.

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. According to the recent data released by the Korea Road Traffic Authority and the National Police Agency, 76,000 drunk driving traffic accidents occurred between 2019 and 2023 and five years. However, the problem is that the recidivism rate is quite high, so the average annual recidivism rate for drunk driving for five years reaches more than 40%. In fact, if I look at the criminal history of clients who come to me for drunk driving while working, it is hard to find that they are actually first-time offenders, so drunk driving is a crime that is often repeated habitually or complacently.

[Anchor]
Some point out that habitual drunk driving and punishment are weak, but how much is it compared to overseas? [Seo Jung-bin] I looked a little bit, and in fact, this standard and the statutory sentence itself are not that light compared to overseas. In Japan, as in Korea, we punish those with a blood alcohol level of 0.03% or higher, and in Germany, those with a higher standard of 0.05% or higher, and in the U.S. and the U.K., those with 0.08% or higher are punished when they exceed that standard. Therefore, compared to these countries, the standard itself is not light in Korea, or it is strict and the statutory sentence is not low.

On the other hand, deaths due to drunk driving are also compared a lot, and Korea also has a court that allows up to life imprisonment in case of a death accident due to the revision, so the upper limit is very high compared to this. However, the problem is that the court sentence itself has been strengthened, but the actual level of punishment itself is weak, so there is enough criticism that this recidivism rate does not decrease. In fact, when you work, most of the cases of drunk driving are expected to be punished to some extent. If you say you are a first-time drunk driver when accidents do not occur, you will think of a fine. When it comes to the second, there is a set order in which prison sentences are expected to be given when they become the third, and after these problems, first-time offenders and repeat offenders seem to commit drunk driving once again because they think it will be okay this time. There seems to be plenty of room to listen to these criticisms.

[Anchor]
As you said, drunk driving and drunk driving accidents are continuing only with punishment like this. At the same time, a new law was implemented. Drunk driving prevention devices attached. This is mandatory. What is it about?

[Jeongbin Seo]
According to the Road Traffic Act, which will take effect from now on, people are punished for drunk driving more than twice within five years, and so their license is revoked. In order for the person to obtain his or her driver's license again, he or she needs to install this DUI prevention device. And such a conditional driver's license is issued on the license. If you look at the contents further, you have to attach a drunk driving prevention device during that period as long as you are disqualified from obtaining a driver's license. If you drive a car without such a device, you will be punished again. And even after that, you have to submit something like registration records at least twice a year and take an examination. And if you look at these regulations, you are supposed to punish even if someone other than you can breathe and use these devices instead.

[Anchor]
There's still some time before these devices are introduced to the actual site, right?

[Jeongbin Seo]
That's right. The enforcement of the law began right now, but if you look at the contents, it will not be implemented until it is actually settled, or about two years after it is actually installed and operated. Because now this regulation is applied when a person is punished for driving under the influence of alcohol more than twice in five years and applies for a license to get a license again. That's why if your license is revoked for a second drunk driving after the enforcement date of this law, it takes more than two years to disqualify, so the law doesn't actually work during that period. So I think in the next two years, there will be people who will actually be subject to this law.

[Anchor]
Countries like the United States are said to have already introduced this device, but how effective was it?

[Jeongbin Seo]
It is known that the United States, Canada, and Europe are implementing such a system. According to the U.S. standard, it has been implemented in more than 20 states, starting with California in 1986. There are also research results. In the case of California, there seems to be a significant effect because of such research that the recidivism rate has decreased by up to 70%, but if the device does not pass through, it will not turn on itself. Therefore, it is a means to prevent driving itself, so if it is implemented, it will be quite effective.

[Anchor]
What is the level of punishment if the device needs to be attached but not?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In such cases, punishment will be made on almost the same basis as driving without a license. So you face up to a year in prison or a fine of up to 3 million won. In fact, it punishes driving a car without a device like this, but it also stipulates that operating or damaging this drunk driving prevention device can lead to up to three years in prison. As mentioned earlier, those who engage in such actions, such as switching, breathing on behalf of those who want to drive under the influence, and turning on the engine, can also face up to a year in prison or a fine of up to 3 million won.

[Anchor]
Lastly, let's move on to the last topic. Moon Da-hye, who is currently investigating the police for a drunk traffic accident. Other suspicions have also been raised. It's an illegal lodging business allegation. There are allegations that they operated an illegal lodging business in Seoul following Jeju Island. What's going on?

[Seo Jung-bin]
Mundahye is suspected of using a single house as a shared accommodation business in Jeju Island without reporting it before, and controversy has recently been added that she also used an officetel owned by Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul for a shared accommodation business. The officetel was completed in September last year, and Moon is suspected of providing accommodation for 100,000 won to 150,000 won per day through a shared accommodation platform and a platform called Airbnb without moving in. In fact, according to a recent report, the guest who was interviewed first told me that he was at his cousin's house, but eventually he rented an officetel through an application and said that he was told to tell his cousin's house in advance.

[Anchor]
Not everyone can do the shared lodging business. What are the operating standards?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Shared accommodation business refers to a business in the form of renting a spare room of a house to tourists and receiving money. In particular, in order to conduct such a shared lodging business in a city, you must meet the standards of the Foreign Tourism City Folk Vacation Act under the Tourism Promotion Act. According to this, after reporting the business, the target should be for foreign tourists, and the housing form is possible in single-family, multi-family, apartment, multi-family housing, and such housing. Officetels are excluded from the list at all. So the host also has to meet the criteria for living in the property. As you said, in the case of officetels now, it is a classification that cannot be done by the lodging industry itself, so in the case of Lee Moon, it was not possible to establish such a standard in the first place.

[Anchor]
In addition, if you operated without registering, suspicion of tax evasion will inevitably arise now. If all the allegations that are being raised are true, how much will they be punished?

[Seo Jung-bin]
If you look at the facts that have been revealed so far, it is highly likely that Moon used the officetel as a shared lodging business, and if so, it is highly likely that it will be considered illegal. In this case, you will be punished under the Public Health Control Act, and the standard will be up to two years in prison or a fine of up to 20 million won. However, since nothing has been revealed about the period of use of this or how much profit has been made, I think we can predict the level of punishment in the future only when this point is revealed. Likewise, suspicions of tax evasion while illegally using these companies are inevitably raised, and it is not yet known how much the profit is currently and how much tax has not been paid.According to the Tax Offender Penalty Act, the sentence is expected to be determined according to the facts revealed in detail, as the tax offender punishment law stipulates imprisonment for up to two years or fines up to twice the profit.

[Anchor]
I heard that it is not easy to crack down on or punish illegal shared accommodation, what is the reason?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, it is shown that many of these illegal accommodation companies are active through the platform, but until the actual payment is made, where the accommodation is, specifically, the rooms or such addresses will not be disclosed. Since it is very difficult to crack down on these things before making a payment and we know that it is illegal, the company will guide users on what to do if there is a crackdown in advance. So, for example, it is difficult to crack down on such contents because they share and implement them, such as saying they came to their relatives' house.

[Anchor]
As you said, there seems to be a loose system and regulation, so shouldn't we need an alternative?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Many point out that unregistered illegal accommodation businesses may be exposed to underage accommodation, drugs, and sexual crimes. In addition, in the case of these illegal accommodations, there are many concerns that users may be exposed to such risks because they are not subject to inspections such as fire safety or hygiene safety. For the most part, these companies provide accommodation facilities through such platforms. In fact, many point out that these platform companies are neglecting illegal lodging businesses. Therefore, if it is difficult to crack down on individual lodging companies, it is necessary to consider the way such a system is prepared so that these platforms can be provided with documents necessary for such users or data to confirm whether this is a legitimate company.

[Anchor]
Let's stop here. I pointed out the main incident of the week with lawyer Seo Jeong-bin. Thank you for talking today.

[Jeongbin Seo]
Thank you.