On May 8, 2017, the Defendant issued a written notice of enlistment under the name of the head of Pyeongtaek-dong Military Branch of Gangwon-do to enlistment at his home, and from June 20, 2017 to June 14:00, the Defendant did not enlist within three days from the date of enlistment without good cause.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes notifying the filing of an accusation, a written accusation, and enlistment in active service;

1. Determination as to the defendant's assertion on criminal facts under Article 88 (1) 1 of the Military Service Act

1. The gist of the assertion is that the Defendant, as a believers witness, refused to enlist in active duty service according to a religious conscience, and such right to refuse military service is guaranteed pursuant to Article 18 of the International Covenant on Freedom of religion and Freedom of conscience under the Constitution and Freedom of Civil and Political Rights, and thus, the Defendant’s refusal to enlist in active duty service constitutes “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

2. Under the principle of proportionality on the limitation of fundamental rights under the Constitution, punishment provisions for refusal of enlistment under the Military Service Act cannot be deemed as unconstitutional provisions that infringe on the freedom of religion and the freedom of conscience under the Constitution. conscientious objection based on a religious conscience shall be deemed to constitute “justifiable cause” as prescribed by the grounds for the exception of punishment under the Military Service Act, and the right to be exempted from the application of the above provision of the Military Service Act to conscientious objectors pursuant to Article 18 of the “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights” cannot be seen as derived (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Do2965, Jul. 15, 2004; 2007Do8187, Nov. 29, 2007; 2016Do14539, Nov. 10, 2016). Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is rejected.

The reason for sentencing is that the defendant refuses to enlist in the military according to his religious belief, and the defendant is actually obliged to military service in the future.