양심적 병역거부에 대한 고찰 - 법과 판례를 중심으로 -

There have still been many difficulties in acknowledging conscientious objection to military service in Korea, and it was a careful decision after a long period of legal disputes. ‘National security’ served as the most persuasive reason for the geopolitical position that the Korean Peninsula is surrounded by powerful countries. Conscientious objection to military service is a sensitive issue, judging from the fact that it spans two main constitutional rights: religion and conscience. It has particularly been a subject that was difficult to reconcile with the duty of military service in a divided nation for the past few decades. Ultimately, despite the fact that the Constitutional Court in 2018 ruled in favor of conscientious objectors, it is still a room for controversy about the provision of alternative services. It is necessary to examine the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court rulings to establish desirable alternative services to be instituted in the future. The decision of the Constitutional Court in 2018 and that of the Supreme Court, which seriously considered human conscience, can be valued as a result of carefully examined spiritual liberty. It was also a meaningful decision, reflecting the UN’s opinion on conscientious objection, changes in people’s view, and consideration of more substantial national security. The alternate service system to be enacted in the future should be based on the respect for individual’s conscience, the protection of human rights, foreign legislations, and the reality in Korea. We need to create a new system acceptable enough to our society.