except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. On November 3, 2014, the Defendant, as a member of the homeland reserve forces, was sent a notice of call for the training of homeland reserve forces to undergo secondary supplementary training (4 hours) conducted at the place of malicious and motion reserve forces training at Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on November 17, 2014, but was sent through the mother D, the Defendant was not present in the above training without justifiable grounds.

2. On March 10, 2015, the Defendant, as a member of the homeland reserve forces, was delivered a notice of call for the training of the homeland reserve forces to undergo the secondary supplementary training (4 hours) conducted at the training site on March 19, 2015 at the same place as (1) and (2) on March 19, 2015, the second supplementary training (24 hours) conducted at the training site from March 23, 2015 to March 25, 2015, and the second supplementary training (4 hours) conducted at the training site on March 27, 2015, the Defendant was unable to participate in the said training without justifiable grounds, notwithstanding the fact that the notice of call for the training of the homeland reserve forces was delivered from EF.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each accusation;

1. A receipt of each notice of call for training;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a certificate of call notice;

1. Relevant provisions of the relevant Acts and the choice of punishment for the crimes, and Articles 15 (9) 1 and 6 (1) of the Establishment of Homeland Reserve Forces Act, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, despite the fact that the defendant had been punished several times for the same kind of crime in the past, and in other words, it cannot be deemed that the liability for the crime in the instant case is less severe. However, the fact that the defendant has no record of being punished in excess of the past fine, and that there is no record of being punished in excess of the past, and other various sentencing conditions such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, etc., shall be determined as ordered by taking into account all the