Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

2. The lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the instant facts charged on the ground that the Defendant had “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

In light of the following circumstances revealed through the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, i.e., the defendant participated in various religious assemblies and volunteer activities conducted by the members of B religious organizations from the time when he was forced to leave until October 2018, and was expelled from B religious organizations for personal reasons, but thereafter, efforts have been made to return to B religious organizations by continuing to attend religious assemblies, etc. held by B religious organizations up to the present day, and (2) the defendant is a parent, a member of B religious organizations, and the defendant was serving a sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Military Service Act that the defendant did not enlist even after he was given a written notice of enlistment; and (3) the defendant was not convicted of criminal punishment; and (4) the defendant did not appear to have a violent tendency opposed to religious belief during his entrance into elementary, middle and high schools; and therefore, the judgment of the court below is justifiable, and there is no error of misapprehending the probative value of evidence added by the prosecutor of the court below as to various Internet games.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.