ScholarWorks@숙명여자대학교

초록

This study aims to analyze the characteristics of child sexual abuse cases and examine the criteria used by courts to assess the credibility of child victims’ testimonies, as well as how these criteria are applied in actual judicial decisions. A total of 619 lower court rulings related to child sexual abuse were collected and qualitatively analyzed, focusing on how courts evaluate the credibility of victims’ statements. The analysis revealed that courts primarily consider consistency and specificity as key criteria, while also taking into account a range of factors such as the context of disclosure, the possibility of fabrication, the appropriateness of investigative interviews, potential external influence, and the cognitive characteristics of the child. These judicial criteria closely align with the standards presented in Statement Validity Assessment (SVA) and relevant Supreme Court precedents. This study highlights the need to evaluate not only the content of a child’s testimony but also the process through which the testimony is obtained. It also emphasizes the importance of interview methods in effectively eliciting credible statements from child victims. By providing empirical analysis of actual court practices, this study offers academic value and practical insights for developing child-sensitive investigative and judicial environments.

키워드