[1] The meaning of "where he has engaged in other fields" under Article 92 (1) of the Military Service Act

[2] The case holding that the crime of violation of Article 92 (1) of the Military Service Act shall not be established where a person transferred to industrial technical personnel service of the company was registered as a director of the above company but failed to perform his duties as a director

[1] Article 92(1) of the Military Service Act / [2] Article 92(1) of the Military Service Act

Defendant 1 and one other

Prosecutor

Incheon District Court Decision 2004No81 Delivered on May 27, 2004

The appeal is dismissed.

Article 92(1) of the Military Service Act provides that an employer shall punish a person under mandatory service as technical research personnel or skilled industrial personnel when he/she has such person engaged in any other field than the pertinent designated entity without justifiable grounds. The crime under the above provision of the same Act shall be established where a person under compulsory service as technical research personnel or skilled industrial personnel actually engaged in any other field. The crime under the above provision of the same Act shall be established where he/she has a person under compulsory service as a technical research personnel or skilled industrial personnel engaged in any other field, and only

The court below determined that the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime and dismissed the prosecutor's appeal on the ground that the court below maintained the judgment of the court of first instance which acquitted the defendant and dismissed the prosecutor's appeal on the ground that the Kim Dong-dong, which was transferred to the industrial technical personnel of the defendant corporation, can only recognize the fact that it

In light of the records, the above judgment of the court below is just in accordance with the above legal principles, and there is no error in the misapprehension of facts against the rules of evidence or in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the establishment of a crime under Article 92 (1) of the Military Service Act.

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Yong-woo (Presiding Justice)