The defendant is a witness witness in Jehovahovah.

On July 30, 2015, the Defendant failed to enlist on September 25, 2015, when he received a written notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the director of the regional military manpower office of Gwangju/Seoul regional military manpower office, to enlistment in the 31st group located in the 31st unit in the Chungcheongnam-dong, Gwangju, Chungcheongnam-do on September 22, 2015 from the Defendant’s house located in the 304th unit in the 31st unit in the 304th Dong-dong, Chungcheongnam-do, Gwangju, by electronic mail, and

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in court (the statement to the effect that he did not enlist on the grounds of freedom of conscience after having received the enlistment notice);

1. Application of accusation, accuser statement, and Acts and subordinate statutes of the notice of enlistment in active duty service;

1. Determination as to the defendant's assertion under Article 88 (1) 1 of the relevant Act on criminal facts

1. The gist of the assertion is that the Defendant, as a female witness and a new witness, refused to enlist in the army according to his religious conscience. This is a right belonging to the freedom of conscience guaranteed by the Constitution, which constitutes “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act and thus does not constitute an offense.

2. Determination

A. “Justifiable reason” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act is, in principle, premised on the existence of abstract military service and the recognition of its performance. However, the reason why the nonperformance of the military service specified by the decision of the Commissioner of the Military Manpower Administration, such as illness, is not attributable to the person who failed to perform the military service, i.e., the reason why the non-performance of the military service cannot be justified. However, even if a person who refused the performance of the specific military service is recognized as having superior constitutional value to the legislative purpose of the above legal provision, if the punishment is imposed by the application of Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, it would result in undue infringement of his constitutional right, and thus, such unconstitutional situation is unconstitutional.