1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

There is no dispute between the parties that the plaintiff entered into an employment contract with the defendant company and worked for the defendant company.

The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant Company did not pay to the Plaintiff the total of KRW 6,120,00,000 (i.e., 5,000 x 2 x 6,120 days) of meal service costs from April 19, 1992 to October 31, 2017, although the Defendant Company’s employees, among the employees of the Defendant Company under the Rules of Employment or customary practice, were provided for three-day meal service costs (i.e., 5,00 x 2 x 6,120 x 120). If the Plaintiff was in charge of passenger transport services on the Seoul-Spo Line route in Seoul and re-run back to Seoul after operating to the port in Seoul, the Defendant Company did not apply to the work day, but did not pay the total of KRW 1,448,07,07 (i.e., 85,181 x 17 days). Thus, the Defendant Company should pay the unpaid meal service costs and the unpaid salary.

As to the Plaintiff’s assertion on the amount of meal service payment, the Defendant Company agreed to pay the amount of meal service equivalent to three percent per day to the Plaintiff, who works on board only with the evidence of No. 1.

It is not sufficient to recognize that such a practice exists, and there is no other evidence to prove it.

Next, there is no evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion of unfair non-working against the Plaintiff by the Defendant Company on this part.

Therefore, all of the plaintiff's arguments are not accepted.