Regarding this amendment, politicians,627) the government,628) civil groups,629) court administration offices,630) and the media expressed support and opposition respectively, and public opinion631) also showed mixed reactions. This issue received a national attention. After the proposal of the National Assembly speaker's arbitration bill, the ruling and opposition parties’ agreement on it, and the filibuster in the plenary session after the agreement was broken, the revised bill, partially amended from the original, passed the plenary session of the National Assembly on Apr. 30 and May 3, respectively. From now on, according to the amended law, the prosecution can only investigate “crimes prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as corruption and economic crimes,” and only within the scope of not harming the unity of the forwarded cases. However, despite the amendment, controversy over the process of amending the Enforcement Decree and the Constitutional Court's judgment on competence disputes continue until the end of 2022.632) Meanwhile, on Jun. 21, the Advisory Committee on Improving the Police System of the Ministry of the Interior and Safety released a recommendation for a plan to grant ‘security’ 627) The People Power Party made it clear that they would oppose the handling of the bill, saying that they would stop it with all their might, including the filibuster. The Justice Party proposed the establishment of a National Assembly discussion body for prosecution reform, saying that it supports the prosecution reform and the adjustment of the prosecution and police investigation powers, but opposes the Democratic Party's promotion method of forcible handling in the extraordinary National Assembly in April. 628) A Blue House spokesperson said, "It is a clear reality that the public doubts the fairness of the prosecution's investigation, and the National Assembly's legislation should also be for the people." The Presidential Transition Committee called for an immediate halt to the bill. The police said, “As the National Assembly is discussing it, it is not appropriate to reveal our position.” Prosecutors actively objected, saying, “Now is the time to focus on establishing solutions to the problems revealed after the enforcement of the Criminal Act for coordinating prosecutor and police investigation powers and establishing the revised system.” 629) Civil groups, such as the Korea Bar Association, Minbyun, and People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy also generally expressed the view that "even if they agree in principle to separate the right to investigate and prosecute, it is not an issue to be pursued in a hurry during a regime change, as sufficient deliberation and national consensus must precede it." 630) Through the review opinion on the partial amendment of the Criminal Procedure Act (April 19, 2022), the Court Administrative Office issued a statement regarding the adjustment of investigative powers between the prosecutors and the police and the separation of investigation and prosecution as part of the division of duties within the administrative department. In order to control the risk of excessive or poor investigations by the police, it was suggested that additional or supplementary review is needed for the 13 articles of the amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act. 631) As a result of the survey commissioned by News Tomato to Media Tomato on Apr. 14, 46.3% agreed, 38.4% opposed, and 15.3% did not know about the separation of the right to prosecute and investigate. However, the results of a survey commissioned by the Energy Economics Times for Real Meter on the same day showed that 52.1% were against, 38.2% were in favor, and 9.7% were not sure. 632) Newsis, The ruling and opposition parties in battle over the complete deprivation of the prosecution’s right to investigate, Oct. 17, 2022. 257