병역법위반
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (in fact-finding and misunderstanding of legal principles) by the Defendant alone, even though the materials submitted by the Defendant alone did not recognize that there exists “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant facts charged on the grounds that there exist “justifiable cause”, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. The lower court determined as follows based on the evidence duly adopted and examined: (i) the Defendant entered the written conviction with the influence of his parents who were the “B religious organization” from the time of the Defendant’s lawful adoption and investigation; (ii) the Defendant was sexually and was living with B religious organization as a new member of E; and (iii) the Defendant is continuing to attend an assembly as a member of E; and (iv) is performing religious activities by continuing to provide services; and (iii) the Defendant submitted to the Military Manpower Administration upon the receipt of the notification to the Military Manpower Administration for “I would not respond to the call of alternative military service according to one’s conscience”; and (iv) there is no evidence to acknowledge that there was a pure tendency against his religious belief during the Defendant’s growth process; and (v) the Defendant, upon receiving the notification of military service from the old religious organization and its religious organization to the date of its refusal to perform military service; and (v) the Defendant received the notification of military service from the lower court to the date of its refusal to perform military service due to its religious belief and religious belief.