The Defendant is a person in active duty service.

On November 16, 2012, the Defendant received a written notice of enlistment in the name of the director of the Incheon Gyeonggi-do regional military manpower office on December 18, 2012 in the Incheon Gyeonggi-si regional military manpower office located in 120, the Gyeonggi-do government city on December 18, 2012, and did not enlist in the military service after the lapse of three days from the date of enlistment without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A written accusation;

1. A copy of a certificate of enlistment notice;

1. Application of a copy of a written notification;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion regarding criminal facts under Article 88(1)1 of the pertinent Act, the Defendant asserts that the refusal of military service according to a religious conscience according to the rights derived from the freedom of conscience under Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 19 of the Constitution constitutes justifiable grounds.

However, the "justifiable cause" of Article 88 (1) of the Military Service Act, which is a punishment provision for evading enlistment, is, in principle, premised on the existence of abstract military service and the confirmation of its performance. However, it should be deemed that the reason that can justify the non-performance of the military service specified by the decision of the Commissioner of the Military Manpower Administration, such as illness, is limited to a cause not attributable to the non-performance of the military service. On the other hand, on the other hand, in a case where the right of the non-performance of the specific military service is guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, and even in a case where the right of the non-performance of the specific military service is recognized as having superior constitutional value capable of the legislative purpose of Article 88 (1) of the Military Service Act, if the punishment is imposed by the application of Article 88 (1) of the same Act, it would result in undue infringement of his constitutional right.