政府過去數次修法加重酒駕刑事罰和行政罰，希望全面扼止酒駕事件的發生。本文結合民國97-109 年6 月內政部警政署交通事故調查報告表資料，評估多次酒駕政策修法的成效。研究結果發現：若以民國97 年至100年12 月的酒駕狀況為對照組，後續三次修法加重酒駕的處罰，使駕駛人酒駕機率累計下降70%，同時高酒精濃度駕駛人的佔比也明顯降低。此外，我們的估計結果顯示：民國101-109 年間酒駕罰則的修法，使酒駕肇事的死亡人數累計減少2,498 人，但受傷人數卻無明顯變化，可能的原因是中低酒測值之酒駕者人數的提高，造成受傷人數的增加，抵消了因高酒測值者下降所減少受傷的人數。歷次嚴懲酒駕的修法的確對降低酒駕行為有明顯的成效，但未能完全促使駕駛人分離“飲酒＂與“開車＂的行為，達到「喝酒不開車，開車不喝酒」的政策目的。

This paper empirically analyzes the effects of drunk driving policies. Since2008, the government has revised criminal law 185-3 and article 35 of RoadTraffic Management and Punishment Regulations, aiming to eliminate drunkdriving events by increasing criminal and administrative punishments for drunkdriving. Based on the 2008-2020 Investigation Report of Traffic Accidentsfrom the National Police Agency, Ministry of the Interior, we assessed theeffectiveness of the multiple amendments to the drunk driving policies inreducing drunk drivers and alcohol-related casualties. Taking the drunkdriving ratio from 2008 to early December 2011 as the control group, we foundthat the three subsequent amendments of drunk driving policies until June 2020did cumulatively reduce the probability of drunk driving by 70%. Thedistribution curve of the BrAC value of drunk drivers who took the alcohol testalso shifted to the left; in other words, drunk drivers drink less in response tosevere punishments. The three subsequent amendments to the drunk drivingpolicies also reduced the alcohol-related mortality by 2,498 deaths but did notsignificantly reduce the overall number of injured. A plausible reason might bethat the increase of low/middle BrAC drivers may cause a rise in injuries, but itoffsets the reduced injuries associated with fewer high BrAC drivers. The newpolicies did not wholly persuade the drivers to separate the “drinking” and“driving” and achieve the goal of “do not drink and drive.” Our results offerpolicy implications for further deterrence of drunk driving.