Request for refund due to defective grapes delivered 게시글 상세보기 - 등록일, 조회수, 첨부파일, 상세내용, 이전글, 다음글 제공
Request for refund due to defective grapes delivered
Date
2020-12-15
Hit
713
On November 21, 2018, the petitioner saw an advertisement on grapes at an online community, contacted the respondent and signed an agreement (hereinafter “concerned agreement”) to purchase 4 boxes of 3kg grapes (hereinafter “concerned grapes”), and transferred a total of KRW 82,000 to the respondent’s account.
The petitioner requested refund to the respondent when receiving the concerned grapes on November 23, 2018, claiming that the concerned grapes were defective. The respondent received back the concerned grapes, and made a refund of KRW 67,400 to the petitioner, excluding KRW 14,600 of delivery fee.
The images submitted by the petitioner show that it contained stale and crushed grapes.
The respondent claims that the concerned grapes are not defective, and cannot pay back the delivery fee, as it is a refund due to change of mind.
However, the petitioner argues that the respondent shall also make refund for KRW 14,600 of delivery fee, as the petitioner returned the concerned grapes due to defects.
Clause 3 of Article 17 of the 「Act on the Consumer Protection in Electronic Commerce, Etc.」stipulates that where the contents of the goods, etc., are different from what was indicated or advertised, or have been performed differently from the terms of the contract, the consumer may cancel the order, etc., within three months from the date of receiving the goods, or 30 days from the date he/she knew or ould have known such fact. However, while the images submitted by the petitioner confirmed that there were stale and crushed grapes, the defects were not so severe; neither affected nor rotten. Therefore, this case cannot be considered in the context of the abovementioned “have been performed differently from the terms of the contract.”
Clause 1 of Article 17 of the abovementioned 「Act」stipulates that a consumer may cancel the contract within seven days from the date of goods, etc., have been supplied. As the petitioner expressed the intention to withdraw from the concerned contract to the respondent on the day the petitioner received the concerned grapes on November 23, 2018, it is reasonable to consider that the concerned contract has been withdrawn prima facie.
Still, Clauses 2 and 3 of Article 17 of the abovementioned 「Act」stipulates that where the value of the goods; etc., has substantially decreased due to the elapse of time, making resale difficult or impossible, no consumer shall cancel an order, etc. against the will of a mail order distributor. Moreover, it is reasonable to consider that as the concerned grapes is categorized as food, the freshness of the concerned grapes have significantly reduced due to elapse of time while delivered to the petitioner and again returned, making the fruit difficult to resell. Therefore, the petitioner cannot cancel the concerned agreement against the will of the mail order distributor.
Nevertheless, it is reasonable to consider that on the matter of application for dispute settlement between the petitioner and respondent, no settlement shall be made, given that I) the respondent made KRW 67,400 of refund excluding KRW 14,600 of delivery fee to the petitioner, and ii) the will to resolve permanently through settlement based on concession and reconciliation.
[Relevant laws, notification, etc.] Article 17 of the 「Act on the Consumer Protection in Electronic Commerce, Etc.」
Therefore, the decision has been made as stated above on the above-stated ruling ground.
On the matter of application for dispute settlement between the petitioner and respondent, no settlement shall be made.
