2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

It shall be quoted as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. On April 30, 2015, the Defendant’s additional determination was made in this court on the grounds that the payment date of the letter of payment was made on April 30, 2015. On April 1, 2007, the Plaintiff entered the Korea Limited Company, a local corporate entity C, and returned home unilaterally on March 20, 2014, thereby raising the defective rate of products manufactured by Chinese local corporate entities. Accordingly, the Defendant continued to make the Plaintiff return to China as a Chinese corporate entity, but did not comply with the Plaintiff, and the Defendant did not comply with the agreement with Hong Kong E company and C, which was anticipated to enter into the Fproductive License Agreement. If the Plaintiff worked only until April 30, 2015, the Plaintiff promised to pay 180 million won as remuneration to the Plaintiff.

In addition, even if the Plaintiff reported the Defendant to the Labor Agency as a violation of the Labor Standards Act after deducting the above 180 million won at the time of reporting the Defendant as a violation of the Labor Standards Act, the above KRW 180 million is not unpaid wages, but is placed on the condition of labor after the date of the preparation of the instant payment note, and the Plaintiff did not comply with the said condition.

However, in full view of the following circumstances, the evidence pointed out by the Defendant or additionally presented at the trial alone is insufficient to acknowledge the Defendant’s assertion, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

The defendant's argument is without merit.

① The Plaintiff returned home.