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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person subject to enlistment in active duty service on the new line of “novah’s Witness.”

On November 25, 2016, the Defendant was sent a notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the head of the Gyeonggi-do Military Army Training Center under the name of the head of the Gyeonggi-do Military Branch Office to enlistment in the Army Training Center located in the Gyeonggi-si, Seoyang-si, Chungcheongnam-si, and by December 26, 2016, but did not enlist within three days from the date of enlistment without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A written accusation and a written accusation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to certificates of fact, identification number increase;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel regarding criminal facts under Article 88 (1) 1 of the Military Service Act

1. The gist of the assertion is that the defendant did not enlist in the military as stated in the facts charged, but the defendant's act is so-called "sexual objection" and thus, it constitutes "justifiable cause" under Article 88 (1) of the Military Service Act and thus, not guilty.

2. The freedom of conscience realization by passive omission among the freedom of religious conscience can be deemed as a relative freedom that can be restricted by law pursuant to Article 37(2) of the Constitution in a case where there is a constitutional legal interest to justify the restriction.

However, the duty of military service, which is recognized by the provision on the defense of our Constitution and the provision on the duty of military service, is the most fundamental requirement for the existence of the nation’s community, ultimately guaranteeing the dignity and value of the people as human beings. Thus, the Defendant’s freedom of conscience, etc. cannot be deemed as a superior value to such constitutional legal interests. As a result, even if the freedom of conscience, etc. of the Defendant is restricted pursuant to Article 37(2) of the Constitution for the above constitutional legal interests, it can be deemed as a legitimate restriction permitted under the Constitution.

On the other hand, those who refuse enlistment in active service.