The defendant is a person in active duty service.

The Defendant, around July 17, 2014, sent a written notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the director of the regional military manpower office of Gwangju to enlist in the Nam-gu Office of Gwangju, Nam-gu, 111 Dong 810, and on August 26, 2014 to the 31st group of Gwangju, without justifiable grounds, until August 29, 2014, for which three days have passed from the date of enlistment.

40 80 80

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A written accusation;

1. For the purpose of making inquiries into domestic registration and enlistment in active service, and for the Decree of the Act;

1. The Defendant’s assertion as to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 88(1)1 of the Criminal Act related to criminal facts reveals that the Defendant, as a new witness, refused enlistment in active duty service according to the order of conscience in accordance with the religious doctrine, and such reason for refusal constitutes “justifiable cause” as prescribed by Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

However, under the current positive law that does not provide for special cases that can substitute enlistment for those who refuse enlistment in active service on grounds of religious belief under the Military Service Act, the aforementioned grounds alleged by the Defendant do not constitute justifiable grounds for refusal of enlistment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do1759, Nov. 24, 201; Constitutional Court Decision 2008Hun-Ga22, 2009Hun-Ga7, 209Hun-Ga7, 24, 2010Hun-Ga16, 37, 208Hun-Ba103, 209Hun-Ba3, 2011Hun-Ba16, etc.). Therefore, the above argument by the Defendant is difficult to accept.