A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 400,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the member of the homeland reserve forces belonging to the Gu and America.

1. On March 2, 2012, the Defendant received a muster notice on March 14, 2012, 2012, which was issued by the Chief of the Army on March 14, 2012, under the name of the first unit commander of the Army No. 5837, which was conducted by the Chief of the Reserve Forces in the Gu-U.S., the Defendant was unable to participate without justifiable grounds.

2. On March 2, 2012, the Defendant received a muster notice on March 15, 2012, 2012, which was issued by the Chief of the Army on March 15, 2012, under the name of the first unit commander of the Army No. 5837, which was conducted by the Chief of the Reserve Forces in the Gu-U.S., the Defendant was unable to participate without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of the police interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the filing of an accusation and C/D respective written confirmations attached thereto, the second supplementary education receipt (8h) training in 12 years, the second supplementary education receipt (8h) training in 12 years, the second supplementary education receipt training in 12 years, the second supplementary education receipt (6h) training, and the second supplementary education receipt (6h) of homeland reserve forces organized cards;

1. Relevant Articles 15 (9) 1 and 6 (1) of the Establishment of Homeland Reserve Forces Act and the selection of fines for criminal facts;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of the provisional payment order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant asserts that he/she is not guilty on the ground that he/she refuses training according to his/her religious belief, and that he/she has justifiable grounds for refusing training. As such, under the current positive law, the Defendant’s assertion does not provide for special cases that may substitute training for those who refuse training on the grounds of the freedom of conscience in the Establishment of Homeland Reserve Forces Act. Under the current positive law, the aforementioned grounds for refusal do not constitute justifiable grounds for refusal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Do1759, Nov. 24, 201; 2008Hun-Ga22, 2008Hun-Ga7,7, 209Hun-Ga7, 24, 2010; 16, 37, 2008Hun-Ba103, 2011Hun-Ba6, Aug. 30, 2011>