On June 11, 2013, the Defendant: (a) received a notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the director of the Incheon Gyeonggi Military Manpower Office to enlistment in the Incheon Army Training Center located in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and the Army Training Center located in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, by July 15, 2013; and (b) failed to enlist, without justifiable grounds, until July 18, 2013 after three days from the date of enlistment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written accusation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the receipt of a written enlistment notice, the notice of enlistment in active duty service, and the list of persons not drafted;

1. The Defendant asserts to the effect that, inasmuch as he refused military service according to a religious conscience guaranteed by the Constitution as a new religious organization refuses military service, it constitutes “justifiable cause” as prescribed by Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

The above argument by the defendant cannot be viewed as a justifiable reason under the interpretation of the current Constitution and the Military Service Act.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2004Do2965 Decided July 15, 2004, Constitutional Court en banc Decision 2002Hun-Ga1 Decided August 26, 2004, and Supreme Court Decision 2007Do3795 Decided July 12, 2007, etc.). Accordingly, the defendant’s above assertion cannot be accepted.

In the current law, when a defendant is sentenced to a sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for less than one year and six months or a suspended sentence of such imprisonment with prison labor, the defendant will be sentenced to a minimum sentence meeting the requirements for exemption from military service in consideration of the fact that the defendant is subject to the notice of enlistment at the same time and that if the defendant refuses to