No person who has received a notice of enlistment in active duty service shall enlist in the army within three days from the date of enlistment without justifiable grounds.

On July 4, 2013, the Defendant received a notice from the Defendant’s office located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City to enlistment in the supplementary service on August 20, 2013, and did not enlist until August 23, 2013, which was three days after the date of enlistment.

Accordingly, even after receiving a notice of enlistment in active duty service, the defendant did not enlist within three days from the date of enlistment without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Notice of enlistment in active duty service or inquiry of registered mail;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the written accusation;

1. Determination as to the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 88(1)1 of the relevant Act on criminal facts

1. The gist of the assertion was that the defendant refused to enlist in the army according to his religious conscience. The mere criminal punishment without any legislative effort to prepare an alternative, reduce or exempt such conscientious objectors is in violation of the principle of proportionality as required by Articles 10 and 37(2) of the Constitution, and the right to conscientious objection is a right guaranteed under Article 18(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 19 of the Constitution, so there is justifiable cause under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act for the defendant.

2. Determination

A. The duty of military service, which is one of the citizens’ duty of national defense as referred to in Article 39(1) of the Constitution as to whether a violation of the Constitution or not, is the most fundamental requirement for the existence of a community, and ultimately, is to ensure the dignity and value of all citizens as human beings. The freedom of conscience of conscientious objectors cannot be said to be superior value to the above constitutional legal interests. Thus, for the foregoing constitutional legal interests, the freedom of conscience realization is the same.