On October 25, 2013, the Defendant did not respond to the call-up without justifiable grounds by the date three days after the date of call-up to the Army Training Center under the name of the director of the regional military manpower office in Gwangju-nam District Office to respond to the call-up of public duty personnel in the Army Training Center located in the Masan-dong of Gwangju-gu by November 7, 2013.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to challenge public duty personnel call;

1. The Defendant’s assertion as to the Defendant’s assertion on criminal facts under Article 88(1) main text of Article 88(1)2 of the relevant Act on the Military Service Act is interpreted as not constituting justifiable grounds for refusal of enlistment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Do1759, Nov. 24, 201; 2008Hun-Ga22, 2009Hun-Ga74, 201; 201Hun-Ba24, 201; 10Hun-Ba16, 2010Hun-Ba16, 301; 2031, 2011Hun-Ba, 201; 201Hun-Ba, 301; 2011Hun-Ba, 16, 2010; 2031, 2011; 201Hun-Ba, 301, 2013).

When a defendant is sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for less than one year and six months under the current Act and regulations on the reason of sentencing, considering the fact that the defendant is subject to a notice of another call and that the malicious circulation subject to criminal punishment is likely to repeat again, a minimum sentence that meets the requirements for exemption from punishment shall be sentenced to the defendant.