Claim for Injury and Reimbursement during Pet Grooming Service 게시글 상세보기 - 등록일, 조회수, 첨부파일, 상세내용, 이전글, 다음글 제공
Claim for Injury and Reimbursement during Pet Grooming Service
Date
2024-12-17
Hit
140
A. On December 11, 2021, the Claimant and the Respondent entered into a grooming service contract (“Contract”) for the Claimant’s pet dog (“Dog”). The Claimant paid KRW 35,000 to the Respondent as service fee.
B. The Claimant was informed by the Respondent that the Dog was injured on the leg, and it was given first aid during the grooming service under the Contract. The Claimant visited the Respondent’s shop immediately and saw that the Dog’s wound was serious. The Claimant took the Dog to a veterinary clinic and paid KRW 96,500 for suture surgery.
C. The Claimant demands that the Respondent pay KRW 131,500 (35,000+96,500) as the sum of grooming service fee and medical expenses, but the Respondent argued that the Claimant was seeking damages for unreasonable medical expenses incurred by the Claimant’s request to the veterinarian for excessive care and the Contract did not contain a mutual agreement on damages or reimbursement.
A. Claimant’s AllegationThe Claimant seeks damages in the amount of KRW 131,500 for reimbursement of service fee and medical expenses as the Respondent caused the Dog to be injured when the Respondent fulfilled the Respondent's obligation under the Contract.
B. Respondent’s AllegationAccording to the Respondent's statement, the Respondent was informed that the Claimant would take the Dog to the veterinarian, but the Respondent did not agree to reimburse the resulting medical expenses. The Respondent also argues that the Respondent should not be liable for damages as the veterinarian said the Dog’s wound did not require stitches when they spoke on the phone. Still, the Claimant requested excessive medical treatment, and the Claimant is now asking the Respondent to pay for the unreasonable expenses.
The Claimant seeks damages from the Respondent for tort under Article 750 of the Civil Act. To claim damages from the offender, (1) the damage is caused by negligence, (2) the offender has intent capacity, (3) the offender’s act is a tort in violation of the law, and (4) a causal relationship is proven.It is an undisputed fact that the Dog sustained a wound on its leg when it was groomed by the Respondent. The veterinarian’s treatment is supported by a receipt filed by the Claimant. The Respondent is a sole proprietor, so the Respondent has sufficient intent capacity. As the Dog is an object under Article 98 of the Civil Act, the Respondent has caused loss to the Claimant’s property under Article 750 of the same Act. Therefore, the Respondent is liable to compensate the Claimant for the damage caused by the injury sustained by the Dog during the grooming service.On the other hand, the evidence is insufficient to support the Respondent’s allegation that the Claimant requested for excessive medical treatment from the veterinarian. The Respondent should pay KRW 96,500 for veterinary treatment that the Claimant would not have had to spend without the Respondent’s tort, excluding the KRW 35,000 for the grooming service.
1. The Claimant shall be awarded KRW 96,500 by February 13, 2023.2. Overdue amount shall be paid with the delay penalties amounting to 5% p.a. for each day within the period from February 14, 2023 until paid.
(Applicable Laws: Civil Act, Articles 98, 379, 393, 750, and 763)
