Court Rules in Favor of Ph.D. Student Subjected to Active Duty Draft Due to Remaining Service of 5.99 Months

A court has ruled that when calculating the remaining service period for a doctoral-level specialized researcher engaged in alternative service at a research institute who fails to obtain a Ph.D. degree, the calculation must be based on "months" rather than "days."

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

A was incorporated as a doctoral-level specialized researcher in a university doctoral program to begin alternative service in 2023, but was converted into an active-duty enlistment target in October of last year after failing to obtain a Ph.D. degree within two years.

The doctoral-level specialized researcher system allows holders of master's degrees in science and engineering to engage in research and development work at research institutes to substitute for three years of military service.

If doctoral students fail to obtain their degrees within two years, their status as specialized researchers is canceled, and they must fulfill their remaining military obligations after converting their service period.

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

The key issue was whether A's remaining service period was six months or more.

This is because under the Military Service Act, if the remaining service period is less than six months, individuals can serve as social service personnel.

A argued that when calculated in "months" rather than "days," the remaining service period is 5.994 months, whereas the Military Manpower Administration maintained that 181 days remained based on days.

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

The appellate court pointed out, "Although it is difficult to conclude that the Military Manpower Administration's interpretation is beyond the range of possible interpretations based on 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.'"

Furthermore, the court noted that converting service into days could yield varying results depending on the timing of incorporation or whether a leap year is involved.

Specifically, due to the varying number of days in each month, two individuals who served the exact same two years could end up with different outcomes—one serving as an active-duty soldier and the other as social service personnel—depending on when they were incorporated.

The court stated, "This disposition is an adverse administrative measure that imposes significant disadvantages such as active-duty enlistment," and added, "Administrative laws that serve as the basis for adverse administrative measures must be interpreted strictly and should not be overly expansively interpreted to the disadvantage of the opposing party."

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

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