Actor Lee Jae-ryong, who is under police investigation on suspicion of fleeing the scene after an accident. Yonhap News Agency

After actor Lee Jae-ryong caused a traffic accident and left the scene before being apprehended by police, controversy over drunk driving has resurfaced.

The blood alcohol concentration measured at the time was at the license-suspension level (0.03% or higher to under 0.08%). However, he stated to the effect that “I had not been drinking at the time of driving,” so legally the key issue has become whether he had been drinking when he was actually driving.

According to reports, on the night of March 6, 2026, he was driving on a road near Samseong Jungang Station in the Gangnam District of Seoul, crashed into the median strip, left the scene, and was apprehended by police several hours later.

Many assume that as soon as a certain reading appears on a breathalyzer, the offense of drunk driving is established. However, in criminal trials the benchmark is not the time of measurement but the time of driving. In other words, the key question is whether the blood alcohol level exceeded the statutory threshold at the moment the person was actually behind the wheel.

For this reason, drunk driving cases often feature the following claim.

“I drank after finishing my drive.”

This is the so-called ‘post-driving drinking’ claim.

Courts do not accept such claims based solely on a statement. They comprehensively review the time interval between the end of driving and measurement, travel routes, CCTV footage, witness statements, and on-site circumstances to assess what actually happened.

These standards are clearly reflected in actual case law.

In one case, the defendant asserted that he drank after returning home following the accident. However, the officer who conducted the stop testified in court, “The defendant first denied having driven at all, and only admitted to the crash when it was confirmed on CCTV; he did not say that he drank at home.”

It was also confirmed that the defendant hit a parked vehicle on a one-lane one-way road, then left the scene immediately without getting out of the car.

A trial related to drunk driving. Kyunghyang Shinmun AI image

Taking these circumstances together, the court found it hard to accept that he drank separately after driving and found him guilty of drunk driving.

Conversely, there are cases where the possibility of post-driving drinking could not be excluded. In another case, the defendant consistently stated, “I drank after arriving at the office,” and the statements of those present matched this. When police arrived, there were an empty soju bottle and a half-full soju bottle on the office table, and it was confirmed that the defendant was drinking with snacks.

Considering these factors, the court found it difficult to rule out the possibility of drinking after driving and acquitted the defendant on the drunk driving charge.

In this case as well, a key issue will likely be whether investigators can obtain objective evidence to overturn the ‘post-driving drinking’ claim by Lee Jae-ryong.

Separately from whether he drove under the influence, the issue of failure to take measures after the accident remains. As reported, if he struck the median strip, damaged facilities, and caused a traffic obstruction, the driver must stop immediately and take necessary measures. If he left without stopping the vehicle, criminal liability is likely to be recognized regardless of intoxication.

One reason this case is drawing greater attention is his prior record. A 2003 drunk driving accident and a 2019 property damage incident while heavily intoxicated have been brought up again, reinforcing the image of repeated drinking-related controversy.

One of the turning points that significantly changed social awareness of drunk driving was the Yoon Chang-ho Act. After the case of Mr. Yoon Chang-ho, who was struck and killed by a drunk driver in Busan in 2018, the relevant law was amended, greatly strengthening punishment for repeat offenses.

The dangers of drunk driving are also often depicted in popular culture.

In the drama ‘Dr. Romantic,’ a severely intoxicated driver going the wrong way causes a major chain-reaction crash. One person dies at the scene and another dies at the hospital.

In the story, the medical staff say this to the perpetrator.

“A person has died.”

“Blood alcohol concentration is 0.18. At that level, taking the wheel is tantamount to a death wish.”

This scene remains memorable because it most intuitively shows the dangers of drunk driving. For the perpetrator it may be a brief moment, but for the victim it becomes an event that changes a life forever.

A broadcast still from SBS of the drama ‘Dr. Romantic,’ which portrayed the real-life case of a sanitation worker who lost a leg in a drunk driving crash

Even so, drunk driving controversies involving celebrities keep recurring. Some say the practice of returning after a period of self-reflection has weakened public vigilance.

Now, apart from criminal punishment, the entertainment industry needs to consider clearer standards of its own. One approach is to institutionalize criteria such as suspension from appearances for a set period upon a first violation, long-term restrictions for a second, and in effect a permanent bar for repeated violations. If broadcasters, production companies, and relevant associations establish joint standards, the preventive effect will be far greater.

The core of the drunk driving problem is not only the severity of punishment. It is how clearly one recognizes that once you take the wheel after drinking, you can cause fatal consequences for others, an act comparable to murder.

The facts of the Lee Jae-ryong case will be clarified through investigation and trial. The message this incident sends, however, is clear.

Drunk driving is not a simple mistake but a crime that can destroy the lives of others. It is time for society to recognize that danger even more clearly.

■ Who is Attorney Jeong Tae-won?

During his time at the prosecution, he received the Supreme Prosecutors Office award for Outstanding Trial Division Chief for the first half of 2023, and in 2010 he was commended by the Prosecutor General for merit. He is currently a managing attorney at LKB Pyeongsan, handling a wide range of criminal cases and major cases.