The results of the polls regarding these amendments appear to be tight with slightly more dissenting opinions. Although the results vary depending on the polling agency or the question type, according to the National Barometer Survey (NBS) Report No. 83523) jointly conducted by four organizations, as of Nov. 2022, regarding the opinion on the enactment of the Yellow Envelope Act, 37% of the responses were ‘positive,’ and 40% of the responses were ‘negative.’ B) Controversy Surrounding the Proposed Amendment to the Trade Union Act Even in accordance with the current law, compensation cannot be claimed for damages caused by collective bargaining or actions under the Trade Union Act (Article 3 of the Trade Union Act). Moreover, even under current law, as well as the proposed amendment, collective actions that cause direct damage due to violence or destruction are not exempted from liability. In other words, the issue is related to the extent of the act subjected to immunity (‘acts under the Trade Union Act’), and the main substance of the recently proposed amendment is expanding the scope of the acts subjected to immunity (excluded from the damages claims). The opinion in favor of the revision of the Trade Union Act asserts that in order to be exempted from the damages caused by collective actions, a strike must fall under the conditions set forth in the Trade Union Act and the precedents. However, it is difficult for strikes to be recognized as legal, such as even a strike by a subcontractors’ union that opposes layoffs or restructuring or demands dialogue with the prime contractor is considered illegal strikes.524) It is further asserted that the life of individual members and the activities of the labor union will be greatly reduced in the course of a long court lawsuit due to a large amount of damages claimed.525) 523) National Barometer Survey: regular telephone poll conducted and published by Embrain Public, K-Stat Research, Korea Research, and Hankook Research on their own without receiving requests from external institutions. 524) Supreme Court precedents do not recognize matters related to collective labor relations, such as full-time union officials and guarantees of union activities, as ‘matters other than working conditions’ and are not currently recognized as subjects of ‘labor disputes,’ and layoffs and restructuring are also subject to business management. It is not recognized as a subject of labor dispute because it is a management measure. In addition, lower court precedents believe that ‘rights disputes’ (legal disputes), which are disputes between parties regarding the interpretation, application, and implementation of norms such as existing laws, collective agreements, and employment rules, do not fall under the scope of ‘labor disputes.’ 216