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

Punishment of the crime

A defendant shall be subject to enlistment in active duty service and a person who has received a notice of enlistment in active duty service shall enlist within three days from the date of enlistment.

Nevertheless, around July 26, 2016, the Defendant received a written notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the director of the regional military manpower office in the Gyeongnam-si, Yangsan-si, 707 Dong 601 to 102, which is the Defendant’s residence, from August 30, 2016, and did not, without justifiable grounds, enlist by not later than three days after the date of enlistment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A written statement prepared in C;

1. Application of the enlistment notice in active duty service, detailed information about the result of delivery, and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 88(1)1 of the relevant Act on Criminal Facts [Judgment on Defendant’s assertion]

1. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant’s belief as “novah’s Witness” did not enlist in the military according to the freedom of conscience, and thus constitutes “justifiable cause” as prescribed by Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

2. The freedom of conscience, such as Dominant and Dominant conscientious objection, may be restricted for national security, maintenance of order, or public welfare pursuant to Article 37(2) of the Constitution, as well as for other fundamental rights. In comparison with the constitutional values of national security, human dignity, etc. that are ultimately protected by Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, the applicable law of this case, the freedom of conscience of conscientious objectors cannot be deemed as a superior value to the Constitution.

In light of the above legal principles, etc. on July 15, 2004, the Defendant’s refusal of enlistment based on his religious belief can understand its meaning from the perspective of the freedom of conscience, but at the same time, it is sufficient that such refusal would damage or be likely to damage the constitutional value, such as national security and human dignity and value, as seen earlier. In conclusion, Article 88 of the Military Service Act.