Background
Our clients were four car dealers at an imported-car showroom. A former dealer at the same showroom, Mr. B, ran a purchasing-agent business. He shared information on luxury watches and bags with acquaintances and, when he received an order, sourced the item through Ms. C, a department store employee.
Between March and November 2023, our clients asked Mr. B to buy luxury watches and other items and sent a total of KRW 357,260,000 to accounts in the names of Mr. B and his spouse. The goods never arrived. Mr. B kept a commission and passed KRW 280,760,000 to Ms. C, who failed to deliver and was later arrested and indicted for fraud.
What Was at Stake
Mr. B argued that the purchase contracts were between our clients and Ms. C and that he had merely introduced them. Our clients also sought to hold his spouse, the registered owner of the business, liable.
How Changchun Helped
Changchun built the case around rescinding the contracts with Mr. B and recovering the money paid. The court accepted the plaintiffs' position on two key points.
Mr. B was the counterparty. Our clients had asked Mr. B, not Ms. C, to find the goods, paid only into accounts he designated, and learned of Ms. C only later.
Performance had become practically impossible. Because Mr. B sourced mainly through Ms. C, who was on trial, the court found he could no longer deliver, so the rescission stated in the complaint was effective.
Outcome
In August 2025, the first-instance court ordered Mr. B to repay each client the full amount paid, KRW 357,260,000 in total, with interest and delay damages. The claim against his spouse was dismissed because she had only lent her name and account and was not shown to be involved in the contracts.
When goods ordered through an acquaintance never arrive, documenting who took the order and whose account received the money is the starting point for recovery. (Outcomes depend on the facts of each case.)