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

Punishment of the crime

On September 20, 2017, the Defendant failed to enlist in the Army Training Center in the name of the head of the regional military affairs administration of Gwangju, which was to be enlisted in the Army Training Center in the Republic of Korea as of November 6, 2017 at the office of Net-si, Hacheon-si, Seocheon-si, Hacheon-si, and on the ground that the enlistment notice was contrary to the doctrine of the nature taught in the religious organization B, a religion, and that it was against the doctrine of patriarching, the Defendant did not enlist not later than three days after the

Accordingly, the defendant did not enlist without justifiable reasons.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A written accusation;

1. Notification of enlistment in active duty service, and application of statutes to the current list of persons in charge of military service;

1. Article 88(1)1 of the Military Service Act, as to the Defendant’s assertion on criminal facts, was prepared to embody the most fundamental citizen’s duty of national defense, and the duty of military service ultimately aims to ensure the dignity and value as a whole of the people. The freedom of conscience of a conscientious objector cannot be regarded as superior value to the above constitutional legal interests (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do2965, Jul. 15, 2004). The Constitutional Court also decided that Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act does not violate the Constitution (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Order 2008Hun-Ga22, Aug. 30, 201). Thus, it is difficult to deem that there exists justifiable grounds for the Defendant to refuse to perform the duty of military service solely on the grounds that the freedom of conscience is guaranteed by the Constitution.

Article 18 of the International Covenant provides that the same content is almost the same as the scope of protection of fundamental rights guaranteed in the interpretation of the freedom of conscience under Article 19 of the Constitution and the freedom of religion under Article 20 of the Constitution, and it cannot be viewed that the right to be exceptionally exempted from the application of Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act is derived from the above provision of the Covenant. As to whether to introduce the alternative service system, the above provision shall be applied to the legislative body