The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not have any justifiable grounds for evading enlistment, and that the Defendant did not simply failed to enlist without submitting any explanatory materials according to the legal procedures, such as postponement of enlistment.

Considering the necessity of severe punishment against a person who violates the Military Service Act, the background of the challenge of the defendant's enlistment, etc., punishment corresponding to the quality of the crime shall be imposed against the defendant.

In light of this, the sentence imposed by the court below (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for six months and one year of suspended execution) is too unfasible and unfair.

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, ought to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists a unique area of the first instance court, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Even if the materials submitted in the trial at the trial, there is no significant change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment, and comprehensively taking account of all the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records of this case, the lower court’s sentencing is too unfluent and so it cannot be deemed that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.