Should the late Goryeo Dynasty be called the "Period of Yuan Interference" or the "Period of Yuan Subjugation"?

1. Official view of the South Korean historical community: Period of Yuan Interference • Period of Resistance against the Mongols
   
2. View of the international academic community: Period of Yuan Subjugation • Yuan Imperial Occupation
   Summarizing the Korean claims and the international academic rebuttals:

Goryeo held civil service examinations that only the monarch of an independent state could host.
ㄴ Rebuttal: During the same period, the scholar-official class in Southern China also held civil service examinations.
Goryeo was an independent state that maintained its own system, customs, and institutions.
ㄴ Rebuttal: Tibet, the Turkic states, and European states also maintained state forms similar to Goryeo.
Can a state be considered independent if the King resides in Dadu (Beijing)?
In South Korea, maps of the Mongol Empire that include Goryeo are viewed as part of China's Northeast Project and historical distortion, leading to strong protests. Rather than a vassal or a dependency, Goryeo is regarded as an independent state that paid tribute and received interference; thus, "Period of Yuan Interference" is adopted as the official term in national textbooks.
However, in world history, Goryeo is viewed neither as an independent state nor a vassal state, but as a feudal state or dependency subjugated to the Yuan. More precisely, the era of King Chung of Goryeo is seen as the period of subjugation, while the era from King Gongmin onwards is interpreted as an independent state.

The international academic community argues that for South Korea to claim this map is correct, they would also have to mark Europe, the Turkic states, Tibet, and Southern China—which were in similar states to Goryeo—as independent states like Goryeo.
What is your opinion?