병역법위반
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (in fact-finding and misunderstanding of legal principles) by the Defendant alone, even though the materials submitted by the Defendant alone did not recognize that there exists “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant facts charged on the grounds that there exist “justifiable cause”, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. The lower court determined as follows based on the evidence duly adopted and examined: (i) i.e.,: (i) i.e., upon the Defendant’s consent of his parents, the “B religious organization” was examined; and (ii) her religious organization was committed with B religious service as a new member on February 14, 2009; and (iii) her religious activities were conducted by the following methods: (i) the Defendant is currently attending an assembly as a member of F on a regular basis after her invasion; and (ii) the Defendant continues to engage in religious activities as a member of F on a regular basis; and (iii) the Defendant submitted to the Military Manpower Administration upon the call-up notice that “I would not respond to the call of alternative military service according to one’s conscience as a B religious organization”; and (iv) there is no evidence to acknowledge that there was a pure tendency against his religious belief during the Defendant’s growth process; and (v) the Defendant received military service notice from the former religious organization to its religious belief and military service; and (ii) the Defendant consistently received criminal punishment from the military service.