A. The right to conscientious objection by misunderstanding legal principles has the freedom of conscience for all citizens under Article 19 of the Constitution.

Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Korea is a member shall have the right to enjoy freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.

This right includes freedom to own or accept religious or faith chosen by itself, or freedom to express their religious or belief by way of worship, event, and missionary work, in public or private with others.

(Paragraph 1). No person shall be forced to infringe on the freedom to hold or accept any religion or belief he or she may choose.

(2) Freedom to express one’s religion or belief is subject to restrictions provided in law and provided that it is necessary to protect public safety, order, public health, morality or the fundamental rights and freedom of others.

(3) Since the right is protected by paragraph (3). As such, the Defendant’s refusal to attend a reserve force by exercising the right to conscientious objection as a new member of a D religious organization ought to be construed to constitute “justifiable cause” as provided for in Article 15(9)1 of the Establishment of Homeland Reserve Forces Act (hereinafter “instant legal provision”).

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the defendant's refusal to train the reserve forces. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the duty of military service, one of the citizens’ duty of national defense as referred to in Article 39(1) of the Constitution, is the most fundamental requirement for the existence of a nation’s community, and ultimately, is to ensure the dignity and value of all citizens as human beings. Therefore, conscience realization