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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, as a person subject to enlistment in active duty service on October 13, 2017, at his residence located in Yangsan-si around 18:37, and on November 13, 2017, received a notice of enlistment under the name of the head of the Gyeong-gu Regional Military Affairs Administration, to enlistment in accordance with the 21 association new illness education located in Yang-gu, Gangwon-do on November 13, 2017, but did not, without justifiable grounds, enlist within three days from the date of enlistment without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Accusation of violators of the Military Service Act, notification of enlistment in active duty service, and application of statutes governing delivery progress;

1. Article 88 (1) 1 of the relevant Act on criminal facts [Judgment on the defendant's assertion]

1. The gist of the assertion is “novah’s Witness” and the Defendant refused to enlist in the military according to the freedom of conscience. As such, there exists “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

2. Determination

A. In relation to legitimate grounds, the Supreme Court ruled to the effect that the freedom of conscience realization, such as “sexual objection”, may be restricted for national security, maintenance of order, or public welfare pursuant to Article 37(2) of the Constitution, as well as for other fundamental rights, the Defendant’s freedom of conscience realization shall not be treated as a value superior to the constitutional value of national security, human dignity, etc. that is ultimately protected by Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, which is the applicable law of this case (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do2965, Jul. 15, 2004, etc.). In other words, the Supreme Court has long expressed that there is no justifiable reason.

B. In view of the interpretation theory on the freedom of conscience under Article 19 of the Constitution, the restriction on the freedom of conscience realization, such as conscientious objection, can be sufficiently possible as the aforementioned Supreme Court’s legal doctrine.

The freedom of conscience stipulated in Article 19 of the Constitution is the freedom of conscience formation and conscientious.