The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person subject to enlistment in active duty service.

On May 31, 2017, the Defendant received the notice of enlistment in the active duty service under the name of the head of the Military Affairs Administration of the Gyeonggi-do, demanding the Defendant to enlist in the military as the 12 B Military Service Association on June 26, 2017 through the Defendant’s father C at the Defendant’s house located in the Namyang-si, Nam-si.

However, on the ground that his religion is "D religious organization", the Defendant did not enlist in the military for more than three days from the date of enlistment without justifiable grounds.

2. Determination:

A. According to the evidence duly admitted, the following facts are recognized.

1) When the Defendant became up with D religious organization’s father C and mother, the Defendant began religious life on India, and came up with her religious life on December 22, 2012, and is currently committing religious life in D religious organization’s F.

2) On May 31, 2017, the Defendant received a notice from the head of the Military Affairs Branch Office of Gyeonggi-do to enlist in the army on June 26, 2017.

The defendant shall not engage in military service in accordance with religious faith as the head of the Military Affairs Branch Office of the Gyeonggi-do branch around that time.

“Before submitting a written confirmation of the church that proves that the D religious organization is the D religious organization.”

3) The Defendant cannot perform his military duty according to his religious conscience, and if the alternative service system is introduced, he will comply with it.

On the other hand, Defendant G was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months by refusing to perform military duty according to religious conscience as Defendant.

B. According to the above facts established under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act, the Defendant is deemed to have refused enlistment in active duty service according to a religious conscience that is absolutely high, and such conscientious objection is included in the “justifiable cause” under Article 88(1) of the Military Service Act.

The reasons are as follows (see, e.g., Gwangju District Court Decision 2015No 1181, Oct. 18, 2016).