The defendant is a person subject to active duty service.

On November 18, 2013, the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant, at the home of the Defendant, issued a notice of enlistment in active service by the director of the Incheon Gyeonggi Military Manpower Office at the Defendant’s office, from November 18, 2013, to the Defendant’s e-mail and mail and until December 24, 2013, should be admitted to the Government-Si of Gyeonggi-do as complement 306 located at the Government-Si of Gyeonggi-do.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not enter the military without justifiable grounds until three days after the date of enlistment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written accusation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the military register inquiry, E-Mail management screen, notification of enlistment in active duty service, and list of persons enlisted for conscription;

1. The reasoning for judgment and sentencing as to the Defendant’s assertion on criminal facts under Article 88(1)1 of the relevant Article of the Military Service Act and the Defendant’s assertion that conscientious objection is protected by the Constitution, citizens, and international rules on political rights, and thus, there exists “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act that the Defendant’s refusal to perform military service is a witness. However, the aforementioned grounds alleged by the Defendant do not constitute “justifiable cause” under the said Act under the interpretation of the current Constitution and the Military Service Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2004Do2965, Jul. 15, 2004; Constitutional Court Decision 2008Hun-Ga22, Aug. 30, 201). The above argument by the Defendant is rejected.

However, in light of the grounds for refusing the enlistment of the accused, equity with other similar cases, and other circumstances requiring the sentencing specified in the records of this case, the sentence as per the Disposition shall be determined as ordered, and the accused shall not be detained until the judgment is rendered without detention and the decision of the accused is made upon his will.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.