On July 31, 2012, the Defendant, as a person eligible for call-up of public interest service personnel, received a call-up notice on November 19, 2012 by the 35th group directly from the former Eynam-gun, 2012. On October 16 of the same year, the Defendant failed to respond to call-up without justifiable grounds until November 22 of the same year, for which three days have passed since the call-up notice was given by C staff members of the former regional military manpower office.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of statutes governing a certificate of evasion of enlistment and a certificate of receipt of call notice;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 88(1)2 of the former Military Service Act (amended by Act No. 11849, Jun. 4, 2013) regarding criminal facts is that the defendant is divided into his/her mistake. However, even if he/she was judged to be a violation of the Military Service Act in 2011, he/she would faithfully respond to the call after the suspension of execution, and even if he/she was ordered to do so, it is highly likely to be criticized in that he/she again committed the instant crime.

The punishment shall be determined as per the order, comprehensively taking into account the various sentencing conditions shown in the records, such as character, behavior and health conditions of the defendant.