Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

Punishment of the crime

Those who have received a notice of enlistment in active duty service or of call-up shall enlist in the army or respond to the call-up within three days from the date of enlistment or call-up, except in extenuating circumstances.

Nevertheless, the Defendant received, on November 2016, a written notice of enlistment in active duty service, to be enlisted as an association of 31 in Gwangju Metropolitan City from the Southern-gun B to the 31 association located in Gwangju Metropolitan City on December 20, 2016, from the early police officer on November 201, the Defendant failed to enlist without justifiable grounds within three days from the date of enlistment.

Accordingly, even though the defendant received the enlistment notice, he did not enlist within three days without justifiable reasons.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A written accusation;

1. Status of progress of delivery of registered mail;

1. From December 19, 2016 to December 20, 2016, notification of enlistment in active duty service (standing reserve service) and application of statutes to the list of persons subject to enlistment in active duty service (standing reserve service).

1. Determination as to the defendant's assertion on criminal facts under Article 88 (1) 1 of the Military Service Act

1. The Defendant, as D believers, refused to enlist in active duty service according to religious conscience.

Since such conscientious objection is guaranteed pursuant to Article 18 of the Constitution’s freedom of conscience and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, there is “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act that the Defendant refused to enlist.

2. The “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act should, in principle, be deemed as the existence of an abstract duty of military service and the existence of the performance of the duty itself, and the reason why it can justify the nonperformance of the duty specified, i.e., the reason why the nonperformance of the duty cannot be attributable to the person who committed the act.

However, a person who has refused to fulfill a specific obligation is guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, and further has superior constitutional value to the function of the legislative purpose of the above provision.