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

Punishment of the crime

On June 26, 2013, the Defendant received a notice of enlistment in active duty service under the name of the director of the regional military manpower office of Gyeongnam-si, that “to be enlisted in active duty service from July 30, 2013 to July 30, 2013” from the Defendant’s residence of 101 Dong Dong 502, the Defendant failed to enlist in the military from July 30, 2013 to the expiration of 3 days from July 30, 2013 without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a written accusation, a written accusation (A) against a violator of the Military Service Act - the Superintendent of the Military Manpower Administration, a written accusation, a written accusation, a written notice of enlistment in active duty service, a domestic registration/mail, and a written notification sent to the Military Manpower Administration

1. Determination as to the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 88(1)1 of the relevant Act on criminal facts

1. The alleged defendant, as the believers of D religious organizations, refused to enlist in the military according to religious conscience, there is a justifiable reason.

2. As 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 2002Hun-Ga1, Aug. 26, 2004; Constitutional Court Order 2008Hun-Ga22, Aug. 30, 201). The Supreme Court does not constitute “justifiable cause” as provided for the exception of punishment under the above provision. The right that conscientious objectors are exempt from the application of the above provision even from the provision of Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Korea is a member of the Republic of Korea, and presented a recommendation by the UNFCCC.

Even if this does not have any legal binding force, it has been decided that it does not have any legal binding force.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2004Do2965 Decided July 15, 2004, and Supreme Court Decision 2007Do8187 Decided November 29, 2007, etc.). Accordingly, the above assertion is rejected.