2020No1916 Violation of the Military Service Act

A

Prosecutor

E. Demurrers (prosecutions) and court reporters (public trial)

Attorney Kim Jong-il (Korean National Election)

Changwon District Court Decision 2016Ma1316 decided July 24, 2020

may 13, 2021

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

Since the defendant's belief is variable and flexible, it is not a firm and sincere conscience, there is no justifiable reason under Article 88 (1) of the Military Service Act.

2. Determination

검사는 원심에서도 항소이유와 같은 취지의 주장을 하였고, 원심은 ① 병역을 거부한 B 신도들 다수가 실형을 선고받아 왔고 피고인의 형 C 역시 B 신도로서 입영을 거부하였다는 이유로 재판을 받기도 하였으며, ② 피고인의 어머니는 1996년 침례를 받은 B 신도이고 피고인은 어렸을 적부터 어머니를 따라 종교모임에 참석하고 성경공부를 하며 B 신도가 되었으며, 스스로의 결심으로 18살 되던 해인 2013. 10. 26. 침례를 받았고 창원 자산회중에 소속되어 현재까지 정기적으로 집회 및 봉사활동에 참여하고 있으며, ③ 피고인은 형사사건으로 형벌이나 소년보호처분을 받은 전력이 없고 평소 폭력적인 성향을 보였다고 볼 만한 자료도 없으며, 학교생활기록부 등에 따르면 학창 시절 궂은일이나 남을 돕는 일에 솔선수범하는 학생이었던 것으로 보이고, ④ 피고인은 B 교리에 반하여 음란한 내용이나 폭력적인 내용이 포함된 프로그램을 시청한 경험이 있고 D이나 E 등 살상을 내용으로 하는 게임을 한 경험도 있으나 침례를 받고나서는 폭력적인 내용이 포함된 프로그램이나 게임을 멀리하게 되었으며, ⑤ 피고인은 헌법재판소 결정과 대법원 판결 이전부터 현역병 입영을 거부하여 병무청으로부터 고발된 후 형사처벌의 위험 등을 감수하면서 종교적 신념을 이유로 입영하지 않겠다는 의사를 밝히고 있는 점 등을 종합하여, 진정한 양심이 존재하지 않는다는 점에 대한 증명이 이루어졌다고 보기는 어렵다는 이유로 검사의 주장을 배척하고 피고인에게 무죄를 선고하였다.

In addition to the following facts that can be recognized by the evidence of this case, the judgment of the court below that held that "the defendant's conscience that the defendant cannot perform his duty of military service based on a religious doctrine as B is devout, firm, and sincere and that subsequent refusal to military service is derived from the genuine conscience, and therefore there is a justifiable reason under Article 88 (1) of the Military Service Act in response to the defendant's refusal to call-up is just, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the prosecutor. The prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

① Under the influence of Defendant’s mother who was a member of Defendant’s family, excluding the father of the Defendant, the Defendant was deprived of her status in preference to the Defendant, in both cases, B, and C, a member of Defendant’s family, excluding his father.

② From around 2013 to 2016, the Defendant was engaged in the act of refusing enlistment in the military, the Defendant is participating in the juvenile gathering with the lessee’s fellows, juvenile gatherings from around July 2013, around August 2013, around around August 2013, around around August 2013, around around August 2014, around September 2014, around November 2014, around 2015, around March 2015, around the two sub-culatorys, around April 2015, around May 2015, around July 2015, around 2016, around 2016, around 2016, around 2016, among the religious volunteers and other property activities.

Conclusion

Since the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judge Choi Jong-chul

Judges Kang Jin

Judges Yoon Jae-young