Objective: A total of 429 donors were recruited for the survey in two tertiary hospitals in Korea between Feb and Nov 2020. The survey was conducted by divided into pre-donation and post-donation. The survey was composed of baseline characteristics, questions for quality of life, including subjective health score, SF-36, PHQ-9, and socio-economic status. We used McNemar’s test and paired t-test for comparing the characteristics between the pre and post-donation. Methods: There were 130 and 299 donors who answered pre and post-donation surveillance, respectively. The main reason to decide donation was the willingness to recipients’ health and happiness (59.1%) or families’ benefit and happiness (52.3%). Also, the main concern to hesitate to donate was physical problems such as the potential risk of surgical complications (22.6%) and kidney failure (20.8%). The subjective health score was significantly decreased from 100 to 36.3 after donation. All categories in SF-36 showed worse change, and the score for depressive mood was also significantly increased after donation. Nevertheless, most donors (84.4%) answered they would donate again if they can go back to before donation. Most employed donors experienced vacation for more than 2 months include unpaid vacation. Payment for kidney donation was performed by donors (40.8%), recipients (35.4%), and divided (17.5%). There were 25.8% of donors who unaware of the refund system after donation. Results: Although donation raised multifarious burdens, most donors had a willingness to donate for altruistic reasons. Multiplicative supports comprise of social and medical aspects would be essential to encourage affirmative donation with considering both aspects of donors and recipients. Conclusions: Objective: Kidney donation induces not only a physical burden but also an emotional, socioeconomic burden in living kidney donors. Composed to the substantial interest for major clinical outcomes such as mortality and end-stage kidney disease, subjective conditions including physical, emotional, and socioeconomic status were disregarded for exploring.  Methods: A total of 429 donors were recruited for the survey in two tertiary hospitals in Korea between Feb and Nov 2020. The survey was conducted by divided into pre-donation and post-donation. The survey was composed of baseline characteristics, questions for quality of life, including subjective health score, SF-36, PHQ-9, and socio-economic status. We used McNemar’s test and paired t-test for comparing the characteristics between the pre and post-donation. Results: There were 130 and 299 donors who answered pre and post-donation surveillance, respectively. The main reason to decide donation was the willingness to recipients’ health and happiness (59.1%) or families’ benefit and happiness (52.3%). Also, the main concern to hesitate to donate was physical problems such as the potential risk of surgical complications (22.6%) and kidney failure (20.8%). The subjective health score was significantly decreased from 100 to 36.3 after donation. All categories in SF-36 showed worse change, and the score for depressive mood was also significantly increased after donation. Nevertheless, most donors (84.4%) answered they would donate again if they can go back to before donation. Most employed donors experienced vacation for more than 2 months include unpaid vacation. Payment for kidney donation was performed by donors (40.8%), recipients (35.4%), and divided (17.5%). There were 25.8% of donors who unaware of the refund system after donation. Conclusions: Although donation raised multifarious burdens, most donors had a willingness to donate for altruistic reasons. Multiplicative supports comprise of social and medical aspects would be essential to encourage affirmative donation with considering both aspects of donors and recipients.