[criminal power] On October 20, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to three years of suspension of execution on August 28, 2017 by night buildings, intrusion theft, etc. at the Gwangju District Court, and the judgment was finalized on the 28th day of the same month, and on March 22, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of suspension of execution on the 30th day of the same month, and the judgment became final and conclusive on March 22, 2018.

【Criminal Facts】

No social work personnel shall desert from his service for at least eight days in total without justifiable grounds.

From January 2, 2017, the Defendant: (a) was called up to serve as a social work personnel member at the 15 Mine Office B of Gwangju Mine-ro No. 29, May 2, 2018; and (b) the same year.

6.11 Landscaping;

6.15 Landscaping;

6. From around 18. and around 25.m. to around 29.m. of the same month, absence from work for at least eight days without good cause.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the accused in the first protocol of trial;

1. Submission of a written accusation following a secession from social work personnel service;

1. Investigation report (C in currency with the competent officer of the mine office);

1. A daily statement on the status of service, a statement on the status of each service and a fact-finding report on each service evasion;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, etc. inquiry reports, investigation reports (verification during the period of the suspension of the execution of the same kind), judgments, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the agreement of cases;

1. The defendant's defense counsel's defense prior to the determination of the defense counsel's assertion on criminal facts under Article 89-2 subparagraph 1 of the Military Service Act, but the defendant's defense counsel asserted that the disposition subject to call-up to social work personnel service on the defendant is unlawful, but the materials submitted by the defendant alone are insufficient to recognize it,

Next, the defendant's defense counsel asserts to the effect that the defendant was addicted to the game addiction at the time of the crime of this case, and therefore, according to the records, the defendant's defense counsel was in a state of mental disorder.