The Defendant is a person in active duty service.

On October 28, 2013, the Defendant received a written notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the director of the Busan regional military manpower office to enlist in the Busan Army Training Center on December 30, 2013 through the Defendant’s house located in Busan District Office B, but on the ground of a religious belief that participating in the war practice in any form as a “D religious organization” is not right, and that it is not right to participate in the war practice in any form, as a “D religious organization”, it did not enlist within three days from the date of enlistment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a written accusation or a written accusation;

1. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant’s assertion regarding criminal facts under Article 88(1)1 of the pertinent Article of the Military Service Act constitutes “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act to refuse enlistment in accordance with a religious belief.

However, with respect to conscientious objection, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, which is a provision punishing the act of evading enlistment, does not violate the Constitution (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Order 2008Hun-Ga22, Aug. 30, 201). The Supreme Court ruled that conscientious objection based on conscience does not constitute “justifiable cause” as provided for the exception to punishment under the foregoing provision, and that even from Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Korea is a member of the Republic of Korea, the right to be exempt from the application of the foregoing provision is not derived (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2004Do2965, Jul. 15, 2004). The Defendant’s above assertion is difficult to accept as a present contrary to the Constitutional Court’s decision and the purport of the Supreme Court’s decision.