news December 28th, Beijing second intermediate people’s Court (hereinafter referred to as erzhongyuan) a final conclusion of the original price of goods by the shop fictional claims, the plaintiff consumers claim by the court to support three times.
think the shop price gouging, Ms. Wang will be a shop to court three times to ask for compensation, the second intermediate people’s Court of Final Appeal dismissed the appeal upheld the court shop, shop to pay 108 thousand yuan compensation to Ms. Wang’s decision.
November 11, 2014, Ms. Wang spent 36 thousand yuan by the shop [11.11] buy shopping Carnival 1 pieces of the original price of 72 thousand yuan a 18 carat gold brand men’s 118.860". The second day, Wang to apply for a refund, the refund causes marked as "making the wrong order / wrong information, refund instructions marked as" commodity price fraud "of original fiction, as" the success of the refund refund". June 24, 2015, the shop where the district development and Reform Commission made a report to deal with the results of the report, the above acts to give a warning and impose a fine of $10 thousand administrative penalty.
after Ms. Wang sued to the court of first instance ordered the shop to refund 36 thousand yuan and 108 thousand yuan compensation.
court of first instance verdict, the shop refused to accept the "real consumers not Ms. Wang, is playing the occupation dummies, involved in the purchase goods not to life consumption and purchase, obviously belongs to the profit to buy, this case should not apply the" consumer protection law "; a trial of the original legal identification is suitable the mistake; development and Reform Commission administrative punishment conclusion cannot be applied directly in the case does not constitute a liability;" price fraud should not bear three times the grounds of appeal to the intermediate people’s court.
online shop for the reasons for the appeal, Ms. Wang argued that in the absence of evidence of the presence of the store where the transfer of their business, it should be identified as their own identity. Moreover, the motive and purpose of their purchase of watches should not affect the identity of consumers. Shop has the intention to mark the original false price. The administrative organ’s cognizance of the illegal price acts can be regarded as the basis of the civil case.
second court hearing that the shop did not provide sufficient evidence to prove that Ms. Wang is not involved in the purchase of products for the purpose of living consumption, so the identity of Ms. Wang to buy goods involved identified as consumers. Application of the law on the protection of consumers’ rights and interests.
second court judgment, the appeal of the shop can not be set up, should be dismissed; the first instance verdict finds that the facts are clear, the applicable law is correct, should be maintained. Accordingly, the above judgment.