The defendant is a new witness with women and is a person subject to enlistment in active duty service.

On November 20, 2014, the Defendant received a written notice of enlistment in the name of the director of the regional military manpower office in Gwangju-gu, Gwangju-do on December 23, 2014, stating that “to be enlisted in the 31st unit located in the 31st unit in Gwangju-dong,” and confirmed it. However, without justifiable grounds, the Defendant did not enlist at least three days after the date of enlistment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to file an accusation, notice of enlistment in active duty service, and written confirmation of receipt of enlistment notice;

1. Determination as to the Defendant’s assertion of criminal facts under Article 88(1)1 of the relevant Act

1. The Defendant’s assertion is the right guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Defendant refused to enlist in active duty service according to a religious conscience as a witness of women and children. Such right to conscientious objection is the right guaranteed under Article

Therefore, the Defendant has “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

2. The Constitutional Court decided that Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, which is a provision punishing the act of evading enlistment, does not violate the Constitution.

(see, e.g., Constitutional Court Order 2002HunGa1, Aug. 26, 2004; Constitutional Court Order 2008HunGa22, Aug. 30, 201). conscientious objection based on conscience does not constitute “justifiable cause” as provided for in the foregoing provision as an exception to punishment.

In addition, Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in which Korea is a member of the Republic of Korea, does not derive the right to be exempted from the application of the said provision to conscientious objectors, and even if the United Nations Commission on Freedom of Rights presents a recommendation, this does not have any legal binding force.

Supreme Court en banc Decision 2004Do2965 Decided July 15, 2004, Supreme Court en banc Decision 2004Do2965 Decided November 29, 2007.