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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person subject to enlistment in active service.

On November 10, 2014, the Defendant received a notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the director of the Daejeon District Military Manpower Office to enlistment in the 416-gil 306 Supplementary Zone from the Government of Gyeonggi-do around 12:25, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, 102 Dong 701, and until December 16, 2012 of the same year, and did not enlist within three days from the date of enlistment without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to file a complaint against a person evading military service (a written complaint, military register notification, enlistment notification in active service, and domestic registration inquiry);

1. Determination as to the defendant's assertion under Article 88 (1) 1 of the relevant Act on criminal facts

1. The gist of the assertion is that the Defendant, who is a new witness to women with friendship, refused enlistment in active duty service according to the order of conscience in accordance with the religious doctrine, and thus, there is justifiable reason to refuse enlistment.

2. Determination ① The Constitutional Court made a decision that Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, which is a provision punishing the act of evading enlistment, does not violate the Constitution (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Decision 2008Hun-Ga22, 2009Hun-Ga7, 24, 2010Hun-Ga16, 37, 2008Hun-Ba103, 209Hun-Ba3, 2011Hun-Ba16, etc.). ② Military service duty is ultimately to ensure the dignity and value of all citizens through national security, and the freedom of conscience of conscientious objectors is superior to the above constitutional legal interests. Accordingly, for the purpose of protecting the constitutional legal interests, the freedom of conscience of conscientious objectors is restricted pursuant to Article 37(2) of the Constitution.

Even if such restriction is permitted under the Constitution (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2004Do2965, Jul. 15, 2004); and (3) the exemption of conscientious objectors from military service or the absence of alternative military service system cannot be evaluated as a violation of the bylaws.