Core ruling

South Korea’s Supreme Court has confirmed that an underground/ground parking lot inside a gated apartment complex is not a “road” under the Road Traffic Act.

Therefore, drunk driving only within that private parking area cannot be used as a legal basis for license cancellation.


Case background

In June 2023, Mr. A drove about 150 meters from an underground parking lot to a ground-level parking lot inside an apartment complex in Namyangju, Gyeonggi Province.

His blood alcohol concentration was 0.12%, well above the legal threshold for license revocation.

The Gyeonggi Bukbu Police cancelled his Class 1 ordinary driving license, treating it as a standard DUI case.


Driver’s argument

A’s side argued that:

The apartment complex is physically separated from public roads by retaining walls and barriers.

External vehicle access is controlled via the management office and security guards.


Therefore, the internal roads and parking areas are not “roads open to the general public”, so the DUI provisions of the Road Traffic Act should not apply.


Legal definition of “road”

Article 2 of the Road Traffic Act defines a road as a place “open to an unspecified large number of people or vehicles for passage.”

The dispute was about whether the apartment parking area meets this “open to the public” requirement.


Lower court decisions

1st instance (trial court):

Ruled for the police, saying that the apartment parking area is still a space where vehicles actually move and therefore should be treated as a road.


2nd instance (appeal court):

Reversed the ruling, stressing that DUI provisions are premised on driving “on a road”.

Courts cannot expand the interpretation to locations that are not clearly roads.

Considering the gated structure, mixed layout of marked parking spaces and narrow internal lanes, and continuous security control, the area is better viewed as a passageway for parking, not a public road.



Supreme Court decision

The Supreme Court’s Special 2nd Division (Presiding Justice Kwon Young-jun) dismissed the police’s appeal without a full hearing (“심리불속행 기각”), meaning it found no legal error in the appeal ruling.

As a result, the revocation of A’s license was cancelled and the appellate court’s judgment stands.


Practical legal takeaway

Apartment complex interiors—especially parking lots and internal lanes where access is controlled—are unlikely to qualify as “roads” under the Road Traffic Act.

Drunk driving only inside such restricted spaces will generally not trigger license revocation under DUI provisions, although other civil or criminal liabilities could still arise if someone is injured or property is damaged.


Reactions in the legal community

Some see the ruling as a clarification of the boundary between private and public spaces in traffic law.

Others warn that it could create a “blind spot” in DUI enforcement, since dangerous drunk driving inside large residential complexes might escape the usual Road Traffic Act penalties if it never enters a public road.

Article: https://economist.co.kr/article/view/ecn202511150017