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

Punishment of the crime

On July 29, 2016, the defendant's house located in Gyeongnam-gun B in the same year.

9. As of the 27th anniversary of the date of enlistment, a notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the head of the regional military affairs office of Gyeong-nam, Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, the 39th anniversary of the date of enlistment was not given to the 39th anniversary of the date of enlistment without justifiable grounds, which was sent to the 39 Army Association in the territory of the Republic of Korea.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the written accusation, written accusation, written statement of full-time enlistment in reserve service, details of delivery of written enlistment notice;

1. As to facts constituting an offense, the Defendant guilty under Article 88(1)1 of the pertinent Act and the reason for sentencing on the charges, arguing that the Defendant, as a female witness, did not enlist in the military according to one’s religious conscience, and that such conscientious objection constitutes “justifiable cause” to refuse enlistment.

However, with respect to the so-called conscientious objection, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision 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 according to conscience does not constitute “justifiable cause” as provided for the exception of punishment under the above provision, and that the Supreme Court did not derive the right to be exempted from the application of the above provision to conscientious objectors according to conscience, even if Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Korea is a member, and that even if the United Nations Commission on the Freedom of Civil Rights proposed a recommendation, this does not have any legal binding force (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do2965, Jul. 15, 2004; Supreme Court Decision 2007Do817, Nov. 29, 2007).

provided, however, that a sentence has been pronounced.