1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who operated a good-speed restaurant with the trade name “D” in the Geum-gu Busan Metropolitan Government, and the Defendant is a student of Chinese nationality, who was employed in the above restaurant from September 2017 to December 31, 2017.

B. From October 2017 to December 31 of the same year, the Plaintiff paid the following total of KRW 1,474,990 from October 31, 2017:

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant money”). ① The amount of the vehicle use fee of KRW 170,00 from October 9, 2017 to November 1, 201 of the same year is KRW 170,000,000, in total, KRW 723,690 in the Defendant’s driver’s license fees, recognition fees, etc. to a specialized driving school on October 28, 2017 and November 13, 201; ③ the amount of the Defendant’s license fees, recognition fees, etc. ③ between December 9, 2017 to December 15, 2017, KRW 431,300 in the herb medicine expenses taken by the Defendant to the G Council, and KRW 150,000 in cash paid to the Defendant on December 31,

C. On the other hand, on September 22, 2017, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff’s right to return back-to-door air ticket from Kim Young-si, the Defendant’s high-speed in Kim Young-si, the Defendant, instead of the Plaintiff, and paid the payment. On January 2, 2018, the Defendant revoked the said payment and received a refund.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 5, each entry of No. 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Of the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff agreed to deduct the money of paragraphs (1) through (3) from the Defendant’s salary that the Defendant received from the Plaintiff’s restaurant as part-time. The Defendant paid on behalf of the Defendant. On January 1, 2018, the Defendant discontinued contact with the Plaintiff and did not return the said money.

In addition, among the money of this case, the money of this case (4) was paid by the defendant on behalf of the plaintiff's airline tickets, and the defendant did not return it even after he voluntarily revoked the payment of the plaintiff's airline tickets.

Thus, the defendant returned the money of this case according to the lending agreement with the plaintiff or obtained profits from the plaintiff's benefits without any legal ground.