A court has ruled that when calculating the remaining service period for a Ph.D.-track specialized researcher fulfilling alternative service at a research institution who fails to obtain 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 plaintiff identified as A against the head of the Seoul Regional Military Manpower Administration to cancel an active-duty military enlistment disposition.

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

The Ph.D.-track specialized researcher program is a system where holders of master's degrees in science and engineering fields engage in research and development work at research institutions to substitute for three years of military service.

If individuals in the doctoral track fail to acquire a degree within two years, their incorporation as specialized researchers is canceled, and they must fulfill their remaining military obligations after their service period is converted.

After the Military Manpower Administration subsequently issued an enlistment notice for the Korea Army Training Center to A, A filed a lawsuit objecting to it.

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

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 terms of "months" rather than "days," the remaining service period was 5.994 months, whereas the Military Manpower Administration viewed that 181 days remained based on days.

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

The appellate court pointed out, "While it is difficult to conclude that the Military Manpower Administration's interpretation is beyond the scope of interpretation possible under the literal wording, there is no provision anywhere in the Military Service Act stating that the mandatory active-duty service period must necessarily 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 leap year is involved.

Specifically, because the number of days varies by month, results could occur where someone serves as an active-duty soldier while another serves as social service personnel despite both serving the exact same two-year period, depending on when they were incorporated.

The court stated, "This disposition imposes a significant disadvantage of active-duty enlistment, making it an infringing administrative disposition. Administrative laws and regulations that serve as the basis for infringing administrative dispositions must be interpreted strictly, and should not be overly expansively interpreted in a direction disadvantageous to the opposing party."

Accordingly, 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.