In December 2021, the Constitutional Court ruled unconstitutional about the video statement of minor sexual assault victims. Afterwards, from June to October 2022, 262 minors who were victims of sexual violence were adopted as witnesses. If the number of witnesses admitted in 4 months is 262, that is 786 in 1 year. There will definitely be secondary harm in the cross-examination in the court.

To prevent such secondary harm, the Ministry of Justice benchmarked the Barnahus model of Northern Europe and proposed an amendment to the Act on Punishment of Sexual Crimes. However, the court presented an opposing opinion to the bill, citing problems with the defendant's right to cross-examination.

Both the Ministry of Justice and the court opinions are valid. Most importantly, it is an effective way to prevent secondary harm while guaranteeing the right to cross-examination. The best way to prevent secondary harm is that a minor victim's statement should be made only twice during the investigation and in court. And the victim's testimony in court should not be made by the accused either. 

In addition, a person with a third independent qualification, not an official of the investigative agency, should be a statement assistant. Considering these circumstances comprehensively, we tried to find a way to find out the truth by preventing secondary harm by minors and guaranteeing the right to cross-examination.