1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 13,000,000 and KRW 10,00,000 among them.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the statement in Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination on the claim for the agreed amount related to the F expenditure (10 million won)

A. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to receive KRW 10 million for the F expenditure used by the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the aforementioned agreed amount of KRW 10 million and delay damages.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant, on May 30, 2014, agreed to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 10 million as the captain of the instant vessel under the condition that the Plaintiff will work as the captain of the instant vessel until May 30, 2014, and the Plaintiff’s suspension of operations around January 2014, arguing that the Defendant did not have a duty to pay the said agreed amount.

On the other hand, the facts that a certain juristic act constitutes a so-called condition precedent that takes effect at the time of the fulfillment of a condition are the so-called juristic act subject to the said juristic act, are alleged to have the burden of proof against the person who intends to dispute the occurrence of the legal effect on the grounds that it prevents the occurrence of the legal effect (see Supreme Court Decision 93Da20832, Sept. 28, 1993). In addition, there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff, by May 30, 2014, agreed to pay the above agreed amount of KRW 10,000,000 as the captain of the instant ship under the condition that it will stop operation as the captain of the instant

3. Determination as to the claim for repair expenses (10.7 million won) by viewing organizations, etc.

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is obligated to refund the above amount of repair cost to the plaintiff, since the plaintiff paid D 5.2 million won, E 4 million won, and F 1.5 million won at the repair cost of the ship of this case on behalf of the defendant.

The defendant does not pay each repair cost at the plaintiff's expense, and the defendant does not pay the plaintiff.