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

Punishment of the crime

Around March 14, 2014, the Defendant received a notice of enlistment in the name of the director of the Incheon Gyeonggi Military Manpower Office to enlistment in the “102 Supplementary Military Manpower Office” in the name of the head of the Incheon Gyeonggi Military Manpower Office from the office of Pyeongtaek-si B Defendant to April 15, 2014, but failed to enlist in the “102 Supplementary Military Branch” by not later than three days after the date of said enlistment without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. A written statement of the accuser (C);

1. Notice of enlistment in active duty service;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquire into domestic registration;

1. Determination as to the Defendant’s assertion of criminal facts under Article 88(1)1 of the relevant Act

1. The defendant asserts that he refused to enlist in active duty service according to his religious conscience training as the believers of the religion called “novahovah’s Witness,” and that the right to conscientious objection is a specific right guaranteed by Article 19 of the Constitution and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (hereinafter “Convention”), and that the defendant does not constitute a crime for the justifiable reason under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act (hereinafter “the instant legal provision”).

2. Determination

A. The "justifiable cause" in the legal provision of this case is, in principle, premised on the existence of abstract military service and the confirmation of the performance of the duty itself. However, it should be deemed that there is a cause that can justify the non-performance of the duty of military service specified by the decision of the Commissioner of the Military Manpower Administration, i.e., disease, etc., as long

(See Supreme Court Decision 67Do677 delivered on June 13, 1967, and Supreme Court Decision 2003Do5365 delivered on December 26, 2003, etc.) (b).

However, the right of a person who refused to perform the specific duty of military service is guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, and further, the right is superior to the legislative purpose of the legal provision of this case.