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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is subject to enlistment in active duty service.

On September 10, 2013, the Defendant received a notice of enlistment in active service under the name of the director of the regional military manpower office of Gwangju-nam District Military Manpower Office to enlistment in the Army Training Center as of October 14, 2013 from the Company C located in Gwangju North-gu, Gwangju.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not enlist in the military without justifiable grounds until October 17, 2013 after three days from the date of enlistment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a written accusation filed against D;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion on criminal facts under Article 88(1)1 of the pertinent statutory provisions of the Military Service Act, the Defendant refused to enlist in active duty service according to his religious conscience as a religious believers, a religious organization, and the Defendant asserts that, pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Constitution, the Defendant is not guilty on the grounds that the refusal of military service based on conscience constitutes “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act and Article 19 of the Constitution, which is effective as the law of the Republic of Korea, is guaranteed by Article 18(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (hereinafter “International Covenant”).

Article 18(1) of the above International Covenant provides that “any person shall have the right to enjoy the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. This right includes any freedom to hold or accept a religion or belief of his own choice and any freedom to express his religion or belief by worship, ceremony, event, or missionary work in a public or private manner with another person.” However, a conscientious objector shall be punished as a violation of Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act without granting a conscientious objector an exemption from military service or an opportunity for alternative military service.

In short, such an interpretation does not contravene the foregoing international agreement (Supreme Court Decision 2007Do7941 Decided December 27, 2007). Moreover, Article 88 of the Military Service Act provides that conscientious objection based on a religious conscience.