Why Korea hasn't actually surpassed Japan's income

The trap when comparing income with Japan is that
people often mistake Korea for being higher
by comparing it based on a momentary concept
rather than the long-term sustainability of income.
For example,
in Korea, there aren't many daytime, 5-day-a-week office jobs
that pay 2 million KRW a month without being extremely dangerous or physically exhausting.
Instead, many people are pushed into jobs that are physically demanding, dangerous, or involve night shifts/rotations,
such as Coupang, delivery, restaurants, or factories.
This is why there are so many "resting" unemployed people.
It is not a matter of having high or low standards;
it is that many people simply cannot endure that level of labor intensity.
Even if they endure it momentarily, they cannot sustain it long-term.
On the other hand, while wages in Japan may seem low,
there are plenty of daytime, 5-day-a-week office jobs that pay around 2 million KRW a month.
Even if the wages are low, there are jobs with a level of labor intensity that the maximum number of people can endure,
and the system tries to retain them rather than abandoning them.
If you calculate statistics based on a momentary concept,
the former (the Korean style) may appear higher.
However, if you consider labor intensity, risk,
and the resulting sustainability,
the latter (the Japanese style) becomes higher.
Delivery work is dangerous if an accident occurs,
and even Coupang is something the body cannot endure long-term.
Salary comparisons between employees are also often based on a momentary concept,
but the age at which people start working is earlier in Japan.
This means the period of zero income is longer in Korea.
Additionally, the proportion of self-employed individuals,
who work longer than employees but earn less, is higher in Korea.
When you look at it from the perspective of sustainability rather than a single moment,
I believe it is not the case that we have surpassed Japan's income.