Start one-on-one
When I have introduced new players to role playing, I often start with at least one one-on-one session. Exactly how you handle that session depends on what system you want to run and your friends personality.
But what I have done before is explain the basics of the system, some of the background knowledge, and then helped them make their character. It also wouldn't hurt to give them an easy solo mission so they can get the feel for it. You can let them keep any rewards they earn for the real group session later. Experienced players should not begrudge giving a new learner a small leg up (and may even appreciate it in a tactical game since it will help the new player be more useful).
Assure them that the table is not judgemental.
You specifically mentioned they were afraid of judgement. With most tables, you can assure them that it isn't the case. This is a game, recreation. Everyone is there to enjoy it.
If your table actually is judgemental, remind the other players that he is new and that they should help him rather than giving him a hard time about it, at least for the first several sessions.
Provide assistance during the play
Liberally provide assitance, and let him know you will provide assitance, for his first few game sessions. In a narrative type game (or narrative portions) feel free to give him suggestions of things he might want to think about. During the tactical portions, the GM probably shouldn't give those types of suggestions, but a more experienced player could.
Depending on his personality and how nervous he is, you might want to give him a "Deus Ex Machina Shield". I would not do this for a confident new player (or anyone who might feel patronized by it), but for a nervous one, it might help them relax to know that in-game-reality will bend itself to ensure that he can't get his character killed or even harmed in a permenant way. Let him know of course that it is temporary and that it will only step in to prevent really bad things from happening, othewise it could impair his agency. But knowing you are safe from the worst results can help you relax at first, much like training wheels.
This might not be as much of a problem as you think. Why? Because munchkining, minmaxing, optimising, whatever you want to call it - is severely limited in 5e. The main techniques for it in previous editions of D&D involved things which are significantly less effective in 5e.
Multiclassing has been crippled by the all-important ability score increases/feats being a feature of class advancement instead of character advancement. There is currently a limited selection of classes and feats, so taking advantage of obscure classes, prestige classes, variants, and feats is no longer an option.
D&D 5e also introduces the concept of 'bounded accuracy'; see here for a good explanation of this idea. There is only so much it's possible to do to optimise a character in 5e, and the gap between an optimised character and an unoptimised one will be fairly small.
Your players will still spend time optimising their characters, of course, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. If a player hasn't spent any time on their character, that's a sign that they may not be particularly invested in them.
As far as creating playable characters with reasonable backstories goes, this is a great opportunity to use their munchkin-ness against them. They're going to want to choose a certain background for the proficiencies it offers - make them justify it. You want to be a Sailor who became an adventuring Wizard with a single level in Cleric? That's fine, but you'd better have a damn good explanation for it.
And using their munchkin-ness against them is a great technique to make them roleplay, too. When they create their characters, they'll choose a bond, a flaw, an ideal, and a trait. Let them know that you're happy to hand out inspiration (which is incredibly powerful - advantage to a roll of your choice? Sweet damn, who wouldn't want that?) if they play their character. Positive incentives have been used to motivate people to do what the motivator wants for years, because it works.
Quick bit of backup for all this - I'm DM-ing 5e for a group consisting of 3 munchkins and 2 roleplayers. One of the munchkins is so bad he walked into a core-only 3.5 game and insisted on creating an Artificer. And you know what? He's playing a single-classed Fighter, roleplaying as much or more than the roleplayers, and (as far as I can tell) having a great time doing it. (Oh, and he also has by far the most extensive backstory, he really got into it when he was choosing his background options.)
Best Answer
I too come from a wargaming background before I discovered P&P RPG, so I've been through this as well. A few pointers.
The effects of death. If you lose a wargame you shrug, pack up and have your army ready for your next game. In roleplaying this is not the case: if your character dies and is not raised from the dead, he's dead. This means that you can't play that character again (unless you're being passive-agressive with the DM and make Larry the Fighter the successor to Barry the Fighter, but I advice against this) and have to make a new one. This will eventually happen, so be prepared for this both mentally and with a new character at the ready (though it is smart to keep your stack of sheets with backup characters out of the DM's sight, many do not take kindly to the implication)
It's not all about you. Sure, your character may be a badass, but there's an entire party of badasses. Know when you can shine and when you should not: let them do their thing and they will (hopefully) let you do yours.
I hope this is at least some help to you, and if you have more questions I'd love to hear them.