If you refused a breath test or drank after driving,
a heavier penalty than DUI awaits

Why refusal is punished more heavily

When a driver refuses the test, the BAC cannot be known and the DUI penalty system loses its force. To prevent this, the Road Traffic Act sets a higher penalty for refusal than for drunk driving at 0.03% to under 0.2%.

Refusal is defined in Article 44(2) of the Road Traffic Act and obstruction in Article 44(5).

What counts as test obstruction

To stop drivers from buying and drinking alcohol at a convenience store right after an accident or after evading a checkpoint and then claiming "I drank after I finished driving," a penalty provision took effect on June 4, 2025. If a person whom there is reasonable cause to believe drove while drunk drinks more alcohol or uses medicine or other substances that affect BAC after driving, for the purpose of making the test difficult, the same penalty as refusal applies. If the person also obstructed the test after an accident that injured someone, the disqualification period is extended up to a maximum of 5 years (Article 82(2)3(c)).

Points on which the charge can be contested

• Was there reasonable cause? · We look at whether objective circumstances at the time of the demand, such as speech, gait, smell of alcohol, and the way you were driving, gave grounds to judge that you were drunk.
• Were you the driver? · We check whether you actually drove, and whether the demand was made to someone who had been at home for a long time after driving ended.
• Was the refusal clear? · We distinguish whether failing to blow properly was intentional or caused by a respiratory condition or panic. Case law does not treat brief hesitation as refusal; the standard is whether an intent not to take the test was objectively clear.
• Was the procedure lawful? · If the demand was made during an unlawful arrest or forced escort, the validity of the demand itself can be challenged.
• If you chose a blood test · If you requested or consented to a blood draw instead of a breath test, that is not "non-compliance with the test" within the meaning of the Traffic Accident Settlement Act (proviso to Article 3(2)).

Frequently Asked Questions

Related Guides

Written on the basis of Korean statutes in force (National Law Information Center, Ministry of Government Legislation) and court precedents as of October 20, 2026. Results may differ with amendments to the law or the facts of each case. This page is general information, not legal advice.

Written and reviewed by Attorney Dongwoo Shin — Ph.D. in Law; certified criminal law specialist and certified divorce law specialist registered with the Korean Bar Association. He handles each case personally from consultation to judgment. About the attorney →
Last updated October 20, 2026