A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who has been on August 29, 2009 and served as a witness of Shhohovah and has been engaged in religious activities with good faith until now, and is a person subject to enlistment in active duty service.

On October 5, 2014, the Defendant confirmed the enlistment notice of the director of the Incheon Gyeonggi Military Manpower Office to be enlisted in active duty service on November 18, 2014 at the Internet Love Port Site site on the 306 supplementary squad located in the 18th century on November 18, 2014. Although the Defendant directly received the enlistment notice of the same contents as the enlistment notice at the Defendant’s house located in Suwon-si C and Dong B02 during the same month, the Defendant did not enlist until November 21, 2014, on the ground that the Defendant violated the doctrine of sexual intercourse teaching the believers teaching the believers and the witness teaching the believers to which the Defendant is new, and that such enlistment was not completed three days after the date of enlistment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written accusation, military register inquiry, and e-mail receipt of the enlistment notice, and copy of the enlistment notice;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a fact-finding certificate (Influence of the Esium for witnesses);

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion on criminal facts under Article 88(1) of the pertinent statutory provisions of the Military Service Act, the Defendant, as “novah’s Witness, refused enlistment according to a religious belief.” This asserts that conscientious objection is based on the freedom of conscience guaranteed by the Constitution and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the freedom of religion, and constitutes “justifiable cause” as prescribed by Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

However, the freedom of conscience under the Constitution is recognized, and it is not recognized as the right to refuse to perform the duty of military service on the grounds of conscience, but can be recognized separately only when the Constitution expressly provides for this.

(See Constitutional Court Order 2002HunGa1 delivered on August 26, 2004, etc.) In addition, the issue of whether to introduce alternative military service in relation to military service is ultimately national security, even if alternative military service is permitted.