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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a new witness with women and is a person subject to enlistment in active duty service.

On September 21, 2014, the Defendant received a written notice of enlistment in active duty service (B) under the name of the director of the Seoul Regional Military Manpower Office to enlist in the 306 Supplementary Zone as of November 4, 2014, and did not enlist, without justifiable grounds, until the 7th day of the same month after the date of enlistment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Application of an accusation, a written notice of enlistment in active duty service, a registration of a person subject to a draft physical examination (A), and an e-mail notification management statute

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion on criminal facts under Article 88(1)1 of the pertinent statutory provisions on the Military Service Act, the Defendant asserts that there exists a justifiable reason under Article 88(1) of the same Act for the Defendant, since the right to conscientious objection is guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea and Article 18(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

On the other hand, the Constitutional Court decided 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 Order 2002Hun-Ga1, Aug. 26, 2004; Constitutional Court Order 2008Hun-Ga22, Aug. 30, 201). conscientious objection based on conscience does not constitute “justifiable cause” as provided for as an exception to punishment under the above provision, and even from Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which the Republic of Korea is a member, the right to be exempted from the application of the above provision is not derived, and even if the United Nations Commission on Freedom of Law presented recommendations, this does not have any legal binding force.

Supreme Court Decision 2004Do205 Delivered on July 15, 2004