Mink Hair Change Raccoon Hair Court Court Judgment 3 Times Compensation

　　 Appeal to court

Customer buying Mink sweater Detection found inconsistent

In September 22, 2014, Mr. Cui spent 5550 yuan in Xinguang heaven and earth to buy a Moncler children's down jacket, and the label fabric of the commodity label was shown as fur collar and 100% mink hair.

On the second day, Mr. Cui spent 2863 yuan on Xinguang heaven and earth to buy a Moschino children's down jacket, and the label fabric of the commodity label was 100% fur fox.

When Mr. Choi bought it, he objection to the logo of the two down garments. In October 8, 2014 and November 4th, he sent two down garments to Beijing Dong Zhen textile and Garment Quality Inspection Co., Ltd. and the national leather products quality supervision and inspection center, and found that the conclusion was not consistent with the Chinese tag.

Mr. Cui appealed to the court for return and compensation.

　　 Merchant recognition Raccoon dog hair Translation errors

In court, Xin Guang world and Mr. Cui recognized that the collar hair of two down coats is the hair of raccoon dog, not fox fur or mink hair.

But Xinguang does not agree with Mr. Cui's claim. It believes that the quality of the products involved is qualified, and the water shuffling is consistent with the product. Down collar collar is the decoration position, less than 15% of all clothing, and can be removed, can not be marked in the sign.

Xinguang heaven and earth also said that the English part of the clothing label has already indicated that the hair collar material is a raccoon dog. The Chinese logo is wrong, but it belongs to the translation problem, so it is not a fraud.

For Mr. Cui's claim for traffic and time delay, the new world believes there is no legal basis for the court to reject it.

　　 Court cognizance

Consumer fraud costs 3 times a refund.

According to Chaoyang Court, according to law for the protection of consumers'interests "Article fifty-fifth provides that if an operator provides goods or services with fraudulent conduct, he shall increase the compensation for his losses according to the requirements of consumers, and increase the amount of compensation to 3 times the cost of goods purchased by consumers or the cost of receiving services.

The court said that the premise for consumers to get 3 times compensation is the existence of "fraudulent practices" by operators, and does not require the operator to have the subjective intention of cheating consumers. Subjective deliberate deception is a psychological state. Consumers can not judge the subjective psychological state of the operator.

The feather collar composition of the down jacket logo sold in Xinguang world does not match the real situation. For Mr. Cui, the shopping mall is fraudulent.

Although Xinguang Tian argues that the marking error is the negligence of the manufacturer rather than the intention of Xinguang world, the court held that Moncler and Moschino should be highly regarded as a well-known brand to protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.

The importer does not examine the product itself to mark the production of Chinese signs. The defendant, as a direct seller facing the consumer, should also have a high degree of duty to sell the goods, which has not completed the corresponding duty of examination, and the problem that the sale of the goods does not conform to the actual situation has constituted the "fraud" stipulated in the consumer rights protection law, and shall be liable for compensation.

For Mr. Cui's claim for tardiness, transportation and printing costs, the court held that the compensation was enough to make up for its losses, and Mr. Cui did not submit relevant evidence for the three fees mentioned above, so the court did not support it.

In February 12, 2015, Chaoyang Court decided to return the goods at first instance, and returned to the new world for compensation, and compensated 3 times the loss of 25239 yuan.

After the sentencing of the first instance, both the Xinguang world and Mr. Cui refused to appeal to the third intermediate court of Beijing.