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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a woman and a witness to be enlisted for active duty service.

The Defendant, on May 26, 2015, at an unsound place, and the same year.

7. 20. The same year for which three days have passed from the date of enlistment even after the Incheon Games Director General of the Military Manpower Administration delivered a notice of enlistment in active duty service by electronic mail to the Army Training Office located in Seosan-si;

7. Until December 23, 200, the person did not enlist without good cause.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a written accusation, written accusation, military register inquiry, written notice of enlistment, and written notice sent to the Military Manpower Administration;

1. Article 88(1)1 of the relevant Act on Criminal Facts Concerning the Military Service Act [the defendant asserts that he should be acquitted of the defendant since he refused enlistment according to a religious conscience. However, regarding conscientious objection based on conscience, 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 2008Hun-Ga22, Aug. 30, 201). The Supreme Court held that conscientious objection based on conscience does not constitute “justifiable cause” prescribed as a ground for exception to punishment under the above provision. From the provision of Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Korea is a member, the right to be exempted from the application of the above provision does not derive from the right to conscientious objectors pursuant to conscience, and even if the United Nations Commission on Freedom submitted a recommendation, this does not have any legal binding force (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2008Do10687, Jul. 29, 2007).