The Defendant, at around March 20, 2014, sent a notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the mother of the head of the relevant regional military manpower office in Gwangju Jeon-si by up to 102, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, Gangwon-do by April 22, 2014, at the Defendant’s residence located in Seocheon-si B, 111 Dong 201, 201, the Defendant failed to enlist without justifiable grounds until April 25, 2014, for which three days have passed from the date of enlistment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Details of enlistment challenge, enlistment in active duty service, and mail receipt;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the written accusation;

1. Fact-finding on the Defendant’s argument regarding criminal facts and the Defendant’s reason for sentencing under Article 88(1)1 of the pertinent Act on the Military Service Act, which did not enlist in the military as indicated in its reasoning, however, the Defendant asserts that the same constitutes “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, which is the doctrine of “saved witness” and conscientious objection based on one’s conscience and conscience.

"Justifiable reason" under Article 88 (1) of the Military Service Act, which is a punishment provision for evading enlistment, is, in principle, premised on the existence of abstract military service and the acknowledgement of its performance. However, it should be deemed that the reason why the non-performance of the military service specified by the decision of the Commissioner of the Military Manpower Administration, such as the disease, can justify the non-performance of the military service, i.e., the reason why the non-performance of the military service cannot be attributable to the non-performance of the military service. However, on the other hand, even if the right of the non-performance of the specific military service is guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, and the right of the non-performance of the specific military service is recognized as having superior constitutional value to the legislative purpose of the above law, even if the punishment is made by the application of Article 88 (1) of the Military Service Act, it