beta
(영문) 대법원 2017.09.21 2016도21545

병역법위반

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 88(1)2 of the former Military Service Act (amended by Act No. 12560, May 9, 2014; hereinafter “Military Service Act”) provides that a person who receives a notice of convening a call-up for social service personnel fails to comply with the call-up without justifiable grounds, shall be punished by imprisonment with labor for not more than three years, and Article 6(1) of the same Act provides that the head of the Military Affairs Administration shall serve the person with the duty of military service by means of mail, delivery method, or information and communications network.

Article 53(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Military Service Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2720, Jun. 14, 2016; hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the Military Service Act”) provides that the head of the regional military affairs administration shall serve a notice of call of a person subject to call-up of social service personnel on the person by 30 days before the call-up date, and Article 53(4) of the same Act provides that for a person subject to call-up of social service personnel separately, the period of call-up and service may be shortened, notwithstanding paragraph (1) of the same Article.

The Act stipulates.

Meanwhile, according to Article 129(1) and (4) of the Enforcement Decree of the Military Service Act, a person who is difficult to perform the duty of military service due to a disease may postpone the date of performing the duty of military service, and a person who intends to postpone the date of enlistment, etc. shall, in principle, submit a written application for postponement to the head of the regional military affairs office by five days before the said date: Provided, That where the cause has occurred and there is no time to submit a written application for postponement due to a sudden cause, he/she shall submit an application for postponement to the head of the regional

2. A. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record, the Defendant entered the education call of public interest service personnel (the name was changed to social service personnel according to the amendment of the Military Service Act on December 4, 2013) around January 30, 2012, and then entered the education hours due to the increase of the number of times on February 17, 2012.