[1] The meaning of and the standard for determining "false or exaggerated advertisement" under Article 3 (1) 1 of the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising

[2] The case holding that a sale advertisement with the "import timber floor" written on the salkingro as "import timber floor" constituted an advertisement with false or exaggerated words, in the apartment design drawing and model lower parts of the apartment house

[1] Article 3 (1) 1 of the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising / [2] Article 3 (1) 1 of the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising

[1] Supreme Court Decision 2002Du6965 delivered on June 27, 2003 (Gong2003Ha, 1633) Supreme Court Decision 2003Du8203 Delivered on February 18, 2005

Plaintiff Co., Ltd. (Law Firm Han-young, Attorneys Lee Young-young et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Fair Trade Commission (Law Firm Dong, Attorneys Park Yong-ok et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 2007Nu22209 decided April 10, 2008

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. As to the Plaintiff’s liability for the instant advertisement

After compiling the adopted evidence, the court below acknowledged the facts as stated in its decision, and determined that it is reasonable to view that the plaintiff merely as an agent for the new apartment construction project of this case, it cannot be deemed that the plaintiff confirmed the advertising phrase of this case and paid the advertising price, and at least jointly with the non-party corporation, it rejected the plaintiff's assertion that the substantial responsibility for the advertising act of this case is the non-party corporation and the plaintiff

In light of the records, we affirm the judgment of the court below as just, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of facts due to the violation of the rules of evidence, the incomplete hearing, and the misapprehension of legal principles as to the Fair Labeling and Advertising Act, as otherwise alleged in the

In addition, in this case where the issue is whether the plaintiff's responsibility for the advertisement in this case is the issue, there is no error of omission of judgment on the ground that the court below did not provide any special reasons with regard to the plaintiff's assertion that the responsibility for the error of construction of the living room floor of the apartment in this case was against the non-party corporation. In addition, the court below acknowledged that the plaintiff was aware of the circumstances where the living room floor floor was a sloping floor in the design drawing and the model sloping of the apartment in this case, and it can be viewed to the purport of rejecting the plaintiff's assertion, and therefore, there

In addition, the Supreme Court precedents cited in the grounds of appeal are different from this case, and it is not appropriate to invoke this case.

2. As to whether the instant advertisement constitutes false or exaggerated advertisements

The false or exaggerated advertisements as referred to in Article 3 (1) 1 of the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising refer to advertisements that are likely to deceive or mislead consumers by falsely advertising facts or excessively unrefising facts, and are likely to undermine fair trade order. Whether an advertisement is likely to deceive or mislead consumers should be objectively determined on the basis of the overall and extreme increase that consumers with common caution receive the advertisement in question (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Du6965, Jun. 27, 2003).

The court below acknowledged the facts based on the adopted evidence, and rejected the plaintiff's assertion that the advertisement of this case constitutes false or exaggerated advertisements that are likely to deceive or mislead consumers, and that are likely to undermine fair trade order. The court below rejected the plaintiff's assertion that the advertisement of this case constitutes only a little exaggeration or falsity according to the principle of good faith or commercial practice and that it does not constitute false or exaggerated advertisements.

Examining the record in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the judgment of the court below that the advertisement of this case constitutes false or exaggerated advertisements is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles as to the Fair Labeling and Advertising Act, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Hong-hoon (Presiding Justice)