The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal (in fact-finding or misunderstanding of legal principles) that the Defendant’s refusal to serve in the military on the grounds of religious conscience does not constitute justifiable grounds under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

2. On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the grounds that the refusal of enlistment by the Defendant had justifiable grounds under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be deemed to have been proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

In light of the following circumstances revealed by the records in detail by the court below, i.e., the defendant, as C believers on May 21, 201 and living with his religious faith, has consistently participated in various religious assemblies and volunteer activities conducted by C, and the defendant has consistently expressed that he would refuse enlistment on the grounds of religious belief up to the trial. ② The defendant did not have any record of criminal punishment, and there is no confirmed circumstance to suspect the defendant’s religious belief, such as that he did not have any past violent tendency, etc., the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as argued by the prosecutor.

3. Since the appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.