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 service under the Military Service Act.

The defendant, around May 9, 2014, was given a notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the director of the Seoul regional military manpower office, and the defendant did not enlist in the military even three days after the date of enlistment without justifiable grounds, even though he received a notice of enlistment in the military service under the name of the director of the Seoul regional military manpower office, from the defendant's office located in Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City to June 14, 2014.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. A written accusation;

1. To apply a written enlistment notice, a list of persons to be enlisted, and statutes of the postal service bureau;

1. On the grounds that the Defendant asserted on the assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel regarding criminal facts under Article 88(1)1 of the pertinent Act regarding criminal facts, the Defendant refused enlistment in active duty service according to a religious conscience as a female witness. Since the right to conscientious objection is guaranteed pursuant to Article 19 of the Constitution and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Defendant’s refusal to enlistment in active duty service constitutes “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

2. The duty of military service is ultimately to ensure the dignity and value of all citizens as human beings, and the freedom of conscience cannot be regarded as superior value without any restriction.

Therefore, the State’s criminal punishment of conscientious objectors in accordance with the reasonable legislative discretion violates the Constitution Article 10, Article 19, and Article 37(2) of the Constitution, thereby unfairly infringing on the freedom of conscience.

There is no violation of Article 6(1) of the Constitution or Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

In addition, conscientious objection does not constitute “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2014Do5502, Jul. 10, 2014; 2004Do2965, Jul. 15, 2004). Accordingly, the Defendant’s aforementioned assertion is rejected.