I noticed something interesting. O-Chuls reasoning when it comes to ethics seems to be fairly consequentialist, more specifically, utilitarian. He opposes fighting the hobgoblins since it might lead to war. He argues with Gin-Jun about the ethics of attacking the hobgoblins: Killing them leads to hobgoblin attacks against innocent farmers. Gin-Jun, on the other hand, argues that they only fight in self-defense, and any actions by the hobgoblins are on their conscience. He seems to likely adapt a more deontological view.

Also note that Gin-Jun justifies killing non-Evil hobgoblins with "They are part of an Evil society". This strikes me as him worrying about the hobgoblins' moral character and less about the actual consequences of killing them. He also seems to consider himself a virtuous man, so perhaps he adheres to some sort of self-rightous brand of virtue ethics, where destroying Evil is right.