Court Rules Draft Notice Invalid for Ph.D. Student with 5.99 Months Left on Service

A court has ruled that when calculating the remaining service period for a Ph.D. course professional researcher serving alternative service at a research institute who fails to acquire a doctoral degree, the calculation must be based on the number of "months" rather than "days."

The Seoul High Court's Administrative Division 4-1 (Presiding Judges Park Yeon-wook, Lee Kwang-man, and Moon Kwang-sub) announced that it has overturned the lower court's ruling and ruled in favor of the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by a person identified as A against the head of the Seoul Regional Military Manpower Administration to cancel the active-duty enlistment disposition.

A was incorporated as a professional researcher in a university doctoral program in 2023 to begin alternative service, but failed to acquire a doctoral degree within two years, leading to A being converted to an active-duty enlistment target in October of last year.

The professional researcher program for doctoral courses is a system where holders of master's degrees in science and engineering engage in research and development work at research institutes to substitute for three years of military service.

If a doctoral student fails to acquire a degree within two years, the incorporation as a professional researcher is canceled, and they must fulfill their remaining military service after converting their service period.

After the Military Manpower Administration subsequently notified A of an enlistment order for the Army Training Center, A filed a lawsuit in objection.

The core issue was whether A's remaining service period was six months or longer.

Under the Military Service Act, if the remaining service period is less than six months, the individual can serve as a social service agent.

A argued that calculating by the number of "months" rather than "days" left a remaining service period of 5.994 months, whereas the Military Manpower Administration maintained that 181 days remained based on the number of days.

While the first instance court found no problem with the Military Manpower Administration's calculation method based on days, the second instance court reached a different conclusion.

The appellate court pointed out, "Although it is difficult to conclude that the Military Manpower Administration's interpretation exceeded the scope of interpretation possible under the wording," it added, "There is no provision anywhere in the Military Service Act stating that the mandatory active-duty service period must be converted into 'days'."

It also noted that converting service into days could lead to varying results depending on the timing of incorporation or whether a year is a leap year.

Specifically, because the number of days varies by month, the court observed that two individuals who served the exact same two-year period could end up with different outcomes—one serving as an active-duty soldier and the other as a social service agent—solely based on when they were incorporated.

The court stated, "The disposition in this case is a burdensome administrative disposition that imposes a significant disadvantage such as active-duty enlistment," adding, "Administrative laws that serve as the basis for burdensome administrative dispositions must be interpreted strictly, and should not be overly expansively interpreted in a direction unfavorable to the counterpart."

Consequently, the court ruled, "A's remaining service period amounts to 5.9945255 months, which falls under less than six months," and canceled the active-duty enlistment disposition.

The Military Manpower Administration has appealed the ruling.
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.