The accused shall publicly announce the summary of the judgment of innocence against the accused.

1. The Defendant, as a believers of religious organizations B, is subject to enlistment in active duty service.

On October 10, 2017, the Defendant received a notice of enlistment in the military service under the name of the branch office of the Gyeonggi Northern District Military Manpower Branch Office in the Gyeonggi-si, Chungcheongnam-si on November 20, 2017 through the Defendant’s mother E, and did not enter the military service even after three days have elapsed from the date of enlistment without justifiable grounds.

2. The Defendant asserted that he was a “B religious organization” and refused to enlist in active service according to his religious conscience. As such, there is “justifiable cause” under the main text of Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

3. Determination

A. uniformly compelling conscientious objectors to perform the duty of military service and imposing sanctions, such as criminal punishment against nonperformance, is unreasonable in light of the constitutional guarantee system and overall legal order, including the freedom of conscience, and is also contrary to the spirit of free democracy, i.e., tolerance and tolerance of the minority.

Therefore, if a genuine conscience is conscientious objection, such objection constitutes “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

A defendant who asserts conscientious objection can prove the absence of a genuine conscience by presenting prima facie evidence that he is imminent, specific, that his value of existence as a human being is destroyed if he does not act accordingly, and that his conscience is devout, firm, and sincere. A prosecutor can prove the absence of a genuine conscience by impeachmenting the credibility of materials presented.

At least, it is possible for a prosecutor to prove that there is no justifiable reason to prove that the conscientious objector has no justifiable reason.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2016Do10912 Decided November 1, 2018).B.

Judgment

In light of the above legal principles, the records are revealed.