The defendant is a Jehovah’s Witness and is a person subject to enlistment in active duty service who has postponed the enlistment date on the grounds of entrance into a graduate school and such grounds cease to exist.

On May 17, 2016, the Defendant received a written notice to enlistment in the Army Training Center on May 17, 2016, 103, B apartment units B, 103, 103, and June 13, 2016, and did not enlist within three days from the date of enlistment without justifiable grounds.

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, delivery result, and notification to the Military Manpower Administration;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion on criminal facts under Article 88(1)1 of the pertinent Article of the Military Service Act, the Defendant rejected enlistment in active duty service according to his religious conscience as a religious believers, who is a female witness, and asserts to the effect that such refusal constitutes “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

However, it cannot be deemed that the conscientious objection pursuant to the above religious conscience constitutes justifiable grounds under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Order 2008HunGa22, Aug. 30, 201; Supreme Court en banc Order 2004Do2965, Jul. 15, 2004; Supreme Court Decision 2007Do7941, Dec. 27, 2007; Supreme Court Decision 2008Do3242, Jun. 26, 2008); and the defendant’s above assertion cannot be accepted.

It is difficult to expect that the defendant who refuses to enlist in the military according to the religious belief on the reason of sentencing will perform military service.

Therefore, the minimum sentence of a sentence that meets the requirements for exemption from military service is sentenced, but it is not likely to destroy evidence or escape, so the court's detention is not a legal detention.