성폭력범죄에 대한 국민참여재판과 피해자 보호제도에 관한 비교법적 고찰 - 영국 배심제를 중심으로 -

The reason why the victims of sexual violence crimes are not willing to have jury trials is because it is burdensome to testify in front of the judges, and at the same time, it is a much greater burden to testify in front of the jury group in court. Through comparative research on UK jury system, the article examines the protection systems for the victims of sexual violence crimes that could be introduced in Korean public participation trial. There is a restriction on the admission of evidence regarding the sexual violence crime victim’s sexual history under the Rape Shield Law of the UK. In South Korea, judge has discretion in excluding the evidence of victim’s sexual history in sexual violence crimes. However, due to this arbitrary decisions, there exists many difficulties in preventing the secondary victimization. In admitting the Rape Shield Law of the UK, the law should be thoroughly reviewed so that the interests of both the victims and the defendants could be fairly considered in a balanced manner. For example, the author suggests that the UK’s Rape Shield Law 41(1) should be introduced, on condition that the appropriate and detailed exceptions are further placed to guarantee the defendant’s right of the fair trial. While the UK Rape Shield Law 41(6) exceptionally allows the victim’s past sexual activity or history to be used as evidence if the victim’s sexual evidence falls under the ambiguous term of a, ‘specific case’, and the meaning of the rape victim protection law may fade as the exception can be widely recognized. In other words, when such regulation is introduced into Korea, it would be important to specify the exceptional instances under the law. Last but not least, the defendant’s right to a fair trial should be considered in a balanced manner.