'Shooting game unrelated to conscientious objector's religious conviction'

Conscientious objectors, who had been jailed for refusing the mandatory military service, celebrate in front of Daegu Detention Center, on Nov. 30, 2018, after being released following the top court's decision to acknowledge conscientious objection as proper cause to refuse the service. / Yonhap

By Kim Rahn

A man's enjoyment of shooting games does not negate his claim of conscientious objection if he refuses mandatory military service on grounds of religious faith, a court said, Saturday.

The Seoul Sothern District Court recently acquitted two Jehovah's Witnesses ― 24-year-old Kim and 23-year-old Kwon ― of violating the Military Service Act.

Kim and Kwon refused conscription in 2015 and 2017, respectively, saying holding weapons and killing people is against their religious conviction.

During trial, prosecutors said both Kim and Kwon accessed online first-person shooter (FPS) games in which the players participate in wars and kill others with guns or other weapons. Based on the access records, the prosecution said the two people were not “true” conscientious objectors.

Enjoying FPS games, such as “Sudden Attack,” was one criterion in the guidelines of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office in deciding whether a conscientious objector was legitimately refusing service due to religious beliefs. The guidelines came after the Supreme Court ruled in November last year that religious and other beliefs are “appropriate cause” to refuse conscription.

But the local court did not accept the prosecution's account, saying, “The accused were in the process of growth (when they played the games), and considering the games are played in a virtual world, not in reality, playing the games doesn't necessarily mean they had propensity for violence or their religious conviction was weak.”

The court also said that the two men have been participating in religious activities since they were young, and that their school records showed they have lived up to their religious faith. “We also acknowledged their strong willingness to fulfill their duties if alternative military services are adopted,” it said.

Meanwhile, in a separate case, the Supreme Court ruled a person cannot be recognized as a conscientious objector if he has not expressed his conviction to refuse conscription before.

The top court said Sunday that it recently confirmed a one-year jail term for a 28-year-old surnamed Jeong, who was indicted for refusing the mandatory service in November last year.

Jeong claimed he could not carry out the service because holding firearms was against his conscience ― a claim not accepted by the courts.

A local court said he had never expressed such a belief in the past but did so only when he faced conscription, and an appellate court also ruled his cause of refusal was not an appropriate cause according to the Military Service Act.

The top court upheld the lower court rulings. It previously said to recognize a person's conscientious objection, the conviction should be “deep, firm and sincere.”