Full Refund After Sending Back Only Trash? Delivery Platform Changes Stance After Reporting Begins

A raw fish restaurant owner, Mr. A, claimed that he was forced to issue a full refund worth around 100,000 won for an order after a customer alleged that an insect was found in the food.

[Mr. A / Informant / Raw Fish Restaurant Owner: The customer asked us to cancel the order, claiming an insect was found in the raw fish. I said we needed to check the condition of the food and agreed to a refund on the condition that the food be retrieved. What is truly absurd is that they ate all the sea squirts, and sent back only empty shells and trash... It just doesn't make sense. Even the delivery driver was dumbfounded.]

Upon receiving the customer's refund request, Mr. A replied to Baemin (Baedal Minjok) that he would agree to the refund on the condition that the food was collected.

However, the state of the food that came back was shocking.

Far from any insect, most of the food was gone, and what returned were only empty shells and trash.

Even so, Baemin proceeded to cancel the order and issue a refund to the customer immediately.

Mr. A inquired with Baemin about recovering his losses, but the response he received was as follows:

[Mr. A / Informant / Raw Fish Restaurant Owner: I asked them to process the refund after retrieving all the food and when the intact items actually arrived. Who eats all that trash and leaves just four slices of 75,000-won raw fish...]

[Customer Service Representative: We see that you have been continuously informed that a refund is not possible for the order cancellation you agreed to.]

[Mr. A / Informant / Raw Fish Restaurant Owner: They even drank all the soju, and the delivery driver was so flabbergasted, saying, "How can a person really be like this?" I am sick and tired of it.]

[Customer Service Representative: We do not have any process for accepting reimbursement requests regarding foreign substances.]

Mr. A stated that he only received the photo of the questionable insect belatedly, and even then, there was no way to verify whether it actually came from the food or entered from the outside.

Baemin, which previously claimed there was no reimbursement procedure for foreign substances, changed its stance once SBS News Hunters began its reporting.

The company stated that Mr. A was unaware due to not following the official procedure, and that they would guide him through the reimbursement process.

Experts pointed out that if this incident is determined to be the act of a "black consumer," it could be punishable under charges of fraud, obstruction of business, and intimidation.

In fact, there is a legal precedent where a similar case resulted in a one-year prison sentence.

(Producer: Lee Seyoung, Video Editor: Lee Dain, Source of footage: News Hunters, Production: SBS Digital News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.