Although the Defendant received a written notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the director of the Seoul Regional Military Manpower Office to enlistment in the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which is the Defendant’s house on May 16, 2013, in accordance with the filling 306 located in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si on June 18, 2013, the Defendant failed to enlist without justifiable grounds until June 21, 2013 after three days from the date of enlistment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of enlistment notice in active duty service and Acts and subordinate statutes confirming receipt;

1. The Defendant’s assertion on the Defendant’s assertion regarding criminal facts under Article 88(1)1 of the pertinent Article of the Military Service Act asserts that: (a) the Defendant’s refusal to enlist in accordance with the relevant religious belief constitutes “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, which constitutes “justifiable cause” as stipulated under the exception to punishment.

With respect to conscientious objection according to conscience, the Constitutional Court made a decision that Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, which is a provision punishing a person who evades enlistment, does not violate the Constitution (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Order 2008HunGa22, Aug. 30, 201). The Supreme Court does not constitute “justifiable cause” as provided for the exception to punishment under the foregoing provision, and the Supreme Court does not derive the right to exempt a person who refuses military service according to conscience from the application of the foregoing provision even from the provision of Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Korea is a member, and presented a recommendation by the United Nations Commission on ICCPR.

Even if this does not have any legal binding force, the above argument of the defendant is rejected (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2004Do2965, Jul. 15, 2004).

In order to prevent the defendant from being subject to a criminal punishment again after being notified of enlistment at the same time, the defendant shall be sentenced to the minimum requirements for exemption from military service.