The Constitutional Court docket justices put together to rule on a case filed by a person going through aggravated punishment after being caught drunk driving for the third time, Nov. 27. Yonhap
The Constitutional Court docket has dominated {that a} authorized provision imposing aggravated penalties for violating the drunk driving ban three or extra instances just isn’t unconstitutional, court docket officers stated Monday.
The court docket made the ruling unanimously final Thursday in response to a petition filed by a person who was indicted in August 2018 for drunk driving after being sentenced to suspended jail phrases for drunk driving in January 2015 and November 2017, respectively.
Within the petition, the person questioned the constitutionality of Article 148-2 Paragraph 1 of the outdated Highway Visitors Act, which stipulates elevated punishment for these caught drunk driving three or extra instances.
The authorized provision, which requires a jail sentence of 1 to 3 years or a superb of 5 million ($3,400) to 10 million gained for third and subsequent drunk driving offenses, was revised in March 2018 to impose aggravated penalties for drunk drivers who’re caught greater than twice.
The court docket dominated that the aggravated punishment provision for drunk driving doesn’t violate the precept of proportionality between duty and punishment.
“Those that have violated the drunk driving ban three or extra instances are considerably missing in a way of duty for complying with site visitors legal guidelines and security consciousness as a site visitors participant,” the court docket stated.
