The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Basic Facts

On September 27, 2018, the Plaintiff requested repair of electric wheelchairs products owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant products”) at the racing branch, an agent of E, a stock company, which imports and sells electric wheelchairs products from China.

The Defendant, a person operating the D Daegu Total Enterprise Co., Ltd., was requested to repair the instant product from the relevant racing branch, and was handed over the instant product on November 15, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] The Plaintiff’s assertion of the purport of Gap’s evidence No. 1 and the entire argument as to the purport of the whole argument was delayed repair of the instant product without properly notifying the Defendant of the progress of repair, although the Defendant requested on January 25, 2019, March 7, 2019, March 21, 2019; March 21, 2019; and April 4, 2019.

Therefore, as the plaintiff is no longer likely to wait, the defendant requested the defendant to purchase the product of this case, and the defendant returned the product of this case that the plaintiff was not able to repair without any apology and compensation and intended to do so.

While waiting for the repair of the product of this case, the Plaintiff suffered physical and mental damage, such as walking the product of this case, due to the Defendant’s above act, by failing to use the product of this case.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the consolation money of KRW 4.87 million and KRW 30 million which is equivalent to the value of the product of this case as compensation for damages.

Judgment

The following circumstances are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the above facts and evidence Nos. 2 and 3 as well as the overall purport of arguments, namely, the defendant's supply and demand of parts from China on the grounds that the repair of the product of this case was delayed, and there is no evidence to prove that the defendant did not perform it intentionally or by negligence although he could easily procure necessary parts for the repair of the product of this case, and the main reason for delaying the repair of the product of this case is the supply and demand of parts.