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 to women in nursing and is a person subject to enlistment in active duty service.

On March 16, 2014, around 10:30, the Defendant confirmed that he had access to the Defendant’s residence of the Dongcheon-si B apartment 405, Gyeonggi-do, to the “Bana Love” website on April 22, 2014, and was enlisted in the 306 supplementary military service under the name of the head of the Gyeonggi Northern Military Branch Office.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not enlist in the military without justifiable grounds because he did not enlist in the military by April 25, 2014, for which three days have passed from the date of enlistment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the head of the Gyeonggi-do Military Manpower Branch Office (including the C’s statement, the notification of full-time enlistment on April 22, 2014, and the management of e-mail notified persons);

1. Under the current positive law, the defendant's assertion does not constitute justifiable grounds for refusal of enlistment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2011Do1759, Nov. 24, 2011; 201Hun-Ga208Hun-Ga22, Aug. 30, 2011; 201Hun-Ga208Hun-Ga22, Aug. 30, 201; 201; 201Hun-Ga, etc.) under Article 88 (1) 1 of the former Military Service Act (amended by Act No. 12560, May 9, 201); and the defendant's refusal of enlistment in active duty service based on a religious conscience constitutes "justifiable grounds" as prescribed by Article 88 (1) of the Military Service Act. However, the defendant's assertion does not provide for special cases where a person who refuses enlistment in active duty service on the grounds of his freedom of conscience can not be actually exempted from military service.