■ Case Summary The client got behind the wheel to return home after drinking, but was caught driving about 20 kilometers with a blood alcohol content of 0.084%. Due to a momentary lapse in judgment at the time of the incident, he was caught driving under the influence of alcohol, and afterward, he deeply regretted his mistake and wanted to make efforts to prevent recidivism. ■ Case Issues The main issue was that the client was found to have been driving under the influence of alcohol, but his blood alcohol content was measured during a period of elevated blood alcohol content, so it was possible that the actual level at the time of driving was below the 0.08% penalty threshold. From the beginning of the case, Onkang Law Firm developed a systematic and logical legal response to effectively convey the client's frustration and sincere remorse. First, we analyzed the time interval between the time of driving and the time of measurement, and the characteristics of the blood alcohol level during the elevation phase, to prove that the blood alcohol level at the time of driving was likely below the 0.08% penalty threshold. This was called the

■ Case Overview The client was prone to hypoglycemic shock due to his diabetes, and on the day of the accident, his hypoglycemic condition worsened, causing him to temporarily faint. The accident resulted in his vehicle colliding with a damaged cargo vehicle and a street tree, but the client fled the scene briefly without realizing the accident. During the police investigation, the client complained of injustice, citing the circumstances of the accident and his medical condition, and sought legal assistance from Ongang Law Firm. ■ Case Issues The main issues were that the client did not recognize the accident due to hypoglycemic shock at the time of the accident, and that there was no intentional failure to take measures after the accident. ■ Onkang Law Firm's Assistance In order to resolve the client's injustice, Onkang Law Firm focused on thorough fact-finding and legal response from the beginning of the case. First, we established that the client was unconscious due to hypoglycemic shock at the time of the accident.