The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The gist of the grounds for appeal (guilty facts and misapprehension of the legal principle) is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant’s genuine conscientious objectors constituted “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous in misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

Judgment

Examining the facts and circumstances in light of the relevant legal principles, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the instant facts charged on the grounds that the Defendant’s refusal of enlistment was based on a conscientious decision formed based on a religious, inner values, and ethical judgment, and it appears that the Defendant’s refusal of military service constitutes justifiable grounds under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act. The evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to deem the Defendant’s refusal

In addition to the circumstances revealed by the court below, the judgment of the court below which acquitted Q from the charge of this case is just, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as pointed out by the prosecutor, in full view of the fact that Q has continued to engage in the existing religious activities even after having received a verdict of innocence in the court below.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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