The Defendant, as a person subject to enlistment in active service, failed to enlist in the Army Training Center on October 19, 2016 from the Incheon Military Affairs Branch Office to December 5, 2016 without justifiable grounds by not later than three days after receiving a notice of enlistment in the active service under the name of the head of the Military Affairs Administration in the Incheon Gyeonggi-do District Office.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. B written statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a written accusation, notice of enlistment in active duty service, and list;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion on criminal facts under Article 88(1)1 of the pertinent Act, the Defendant’s assertion as to the Defendant’s assertion regarding the crime is justifiable as he/she refused enlistment in active duty service in accordance with a religious belief as a witness with a religious belief.

However, the circumstance that the defendant asserts that there is a justifiable reason for the defendant.

It cannot be seen (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do2965 delivered on July 15, 2004, etc.). It is difficult to expect the defendant to perform the real duty of military service with the reason for sentencing, but a punishment shall be determined by taking into account the term of punishment in compliance with the requirements for exemption from military service of convicted prisoners.