So, as you've seen, a paragraph is a piece of writing, usually dealing with a single theme. Those two ideas you put together clashed and is very unbefitting of the main idea of the paragraph which, I think, is the first statement. Second, you lack depth. The words feel superficial and only taps the surface. It would be nice if you could erase the "thought" verbs and put elaborate details instead. Let me borrow Chuck Palahniuk's words:

"You may not use “thought” verbs. These include: Thinks, Knows, Understands, Realizes, Believes, Wants, Remembers, Imagines, Desires, and a hundred others you love to use."

So instead of: "He remembered his first meeting with So Eun, where he was almost asleep behind the counter."

It will become: "Back when he was just starting, he never expected the late nights. He sat, slumped and dreary from his night shift. He heaved a sigh of boredom and nearly nodded off to the sweet sound of the saxophone from the miniature boom box at the corner of the convinience store. A jolt of shock shook his body, his mind slowly being made aware of the woman knocking on his counter. He blinked, gaped, and scurried up to scan the items she sprawled on the cold table. He feared that this might be his first and last day on the job."

Un-pack, use sensory details. You have to let the readers do the thinking, to show and not to know.

Lastly, you do not use a tilde in any affectionate means. Those things irk me. I noticed your dangling modifiers (which were a lot), like they were misplaced or something, or phrases that needn't to be placed elsewhere. Such as:

"With a thump, she sat down the sofa and hugged the teddy bear tight."

So the red one is the clause (the dangling part) and the yellow one is the subject, the purple one the predicate that contains the object and other details while the blue one is the verb. You have to know which of the three are you going to modify.

"She sat down the sofa with a thump and hugged the bear tight." I do believe that this would be a better phrasing since it will not cause ambiguity, no? Little things like this make up a beautiful story. There was alos inconsistency with the tenses that you use. Let us review subject-verb agreement (and tenses).

Singular subject = is, has, was, had = verb + s

Plural subject = are, were, have, had = base form of the verb

(Exceptions)

I & You = are, were, have, had = base form of the verb

Tenses

Simple Past Tense = S + Past Form of the Verb + O

Simple Present Tense = S + V + O

Simple Future Tense = S + will/shall + V + O

Past Continuous Tense = S + was/were + V + ing + O

Present Continuous Tense = S + is/am/are + V + ing + O

Future Continuous Tense = S + will be/shall be + V + ing + O

Past Perfect Tense = S + had + Past Participle (PP.) of the Verb + O

Present Perfect Tense = S + has/have + Past Participle (PP.) of the Verb + O

Future Continuous Tense = S + will be/shall be + V + ing + O

Well, you just need to remember the formula and you''ll be on your merry way! (I suggest replacing the words 'and, as, were, was - all of the articles' with the word 'damn' and you'll see how you are being redundant. I'm not saying that you should obliterate them, but do try to lessen.) Sound them out and see if it's awkward.

Let's go to the flow! The flow is a very important part of the story, it establishes the and maintains the suspense. It's the one that's responsible for keeping us engrossed. Your story, dare I say it, only brought me the feeling of confusion. It's not the story plot, but it's the depth. It lacks that one thing that prickles me.