The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles, the international rules on the existence of “justifiable cause” under Article 15(9) of the Establishment of Homeland Reserve Forces Act have the normative character of the Constitution. According to Article 18 of the said rules and Article 19 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, the Defendant’s refusal to perform military service according to conscience is recognized as “the right to refuse military service according to conscience.” Thus, the Defendant’s refusal to undergo homeland reserve training based on the above rights constitutes “justifiable cause” under Article 15(9)1 of the Establishment of

(2) As long as a conscientious objector clearly expresses his intent to conscientious objection to service of the reserve forces, such refusal is against the entire period of service of the reserve forces. Since refusal after the first expressed his intention to refuse military service is a single act, it should not be punished separately from the previous violation. Since the Defendant was punished as a violation of the Establishment of Homeland Reserve Forces Act after already expressed his intention to refuse military service, the instant facts charged are subject to a judgment of acquittal or dismissal of prosecution.

B. The conscientious objection to military service is based on a serious religious conscience, and there is a sufficient reason to view that conscientious objection is different from that of a general training. Since the repeated punishment of conscientious objection seriously infringes on fundamental rights, the lower court’s punishment (fine 2,00,000) is too unreasonable in light of such various sentencing conditions.

2. Determination

A. The “justifiable cause” under Article 15(9)1 of the Establishment of Homeland Reserve Forces Act (hereinafter “the instant legal provision”) provides that, in principle, the existence of an abstract duty of military service or a duty of training for reserve forces, and the recognition of the performance thereof, may be based on the premise that the nonperformance of such duty can be justified, i.e., the reason why the nonperformance of such duty can not be caused by the nonperformance of the duty, such as illness and accident.