A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

The Defendant is a social work worker who works for the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Eunpyeong-gu Office B as a general administrative support.

A social work personnel member shall not leave his/her office or serve in the relevant field for at least eight days in general without justifiable grounds.

Nevertheless, from June 4, 2018 to June 15, 2018, the Defendant was absent from work without permission by the Eunpyeong-gu Office for eight days without good cause.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of the Ministry of Labor and the Ministry of Labor and the Ministry of Health and Welfare to a report on a secession from service;

1. Relevant Act on criminal facts: Subparagraph 1 of Article 89-2 of the Military Service Act;

1. Suspension of execution: Judgment on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act

1. The gist of the assertion is that the defendant is absent from work without permission due to mental illness such as depression, etc., for which the defendant cannot be held responsible, and thus constitutes “justifiable cause” under Article 89-2 subparag. 1 of the Military Service Act.

2. Article 89-2 Subparag. 1 of the Military Service Act provides that “Any person who, without justifiable grounds, deserts from service as a social work worker for not less than eight days in total shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than three years.” Here, “justifiable cause” refers to a cause for justifying the nonperformance of the duty of military service specified by the decision of the Commissioner of the Military Manpower Administration, etc., that is, a cause not attributable

The evidence adopted and examined by this court and the records revealed the following facts, namely, ① there is a depression and apprehension against the defendant, but it does not seem to be a sacrific disorder, such as sacrificing and sacrificing, and there is no error in the ability to distinguish things or make decisions. ② As such, the state of the defendant is not a mental state, but a pacific state, and ③ the state of the defendant is to the extent that he can work as a social work personnel when he has continued to receive pain treatment.