This article examines the achievements and challenges of the MeToo movement through the lens of "narrative justice." By amplifying the voices of survivors of sexual violence, the movement has evolved into a collective and political act. However, employing an analytical-descriptive approach, this article demonstrates that, despite its discursive successes, the movement has often remained confined to the stage of "disclosure" and faces a fundamental paradox within the criminal justice system: the tension between the survivor's right to be heard and the accused's right to the presumption of innocence. Critiquing the historical solution of suppressing or silencing narratives to uphold the presumption of innocence, this study argues that a just approach lies in establishing a balance that reasonably safeguards both rights. The criminal justice system is obliged to protect the fundamental right to the presumption of innocence and the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, while simultaneously recognizing the fundamental right of survivors to be heard and seek justice. Although the proposed model does not resolve all complexities, it at least keeps this paradox "open" in a just manner, rather than resolving it in favor of one party.