"Democratic Party's General Election Campaign Costume Restocking Cost Dispute... Promotion Company Loses Compensation Lawsuit"

The photo is unrelated to the article content. [Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] A company that was in charge of promotional agency work for the Democratic Party of Korea in the 21st National Assembly election filed a lawsuit against the Democratic Party demanding compensation for damages related to unsold election uniforms, but lost in the first trial.

According to the court on the 19th, the Civil Division 34 of the Seoul Central District Court (Presiding Judge Kim Yangho) recently ruled against the plaintiff in a damage compensation lawsuit worth about 400 million KRW filed by advertising production and agency company A against the Democratic Party.

Earlier, in March 2020, company A signed a 'promotional agency' contract with the Democratic Party related to the 21st general election. Meanwhile, company A contracted with custom manufacturer company B to produce and supply the Democratic Party's election uniforms such as baseball jumpers, polo shirts, and hats to individual candidates.

However, contrary to expectations, each Democratic Party candidate directly produced and wore election uniforms at their respective local constituencies and actively participated in the election campaign. The election uniforms purchased by company A from company B remained entirely unsold and stayed as inventory.

Company A claimed, "Since an implicit 'consignment contract' for purchasing election uniforms was established with the Democratic Party, with whom the promotional agency contract was signed, the Democratic Party should pay the amount corresponding to the unsold quantity." They also argued that the Democratic Party was at fault for failing to anticipate that candidates might produce and wear election uniforms themselves.

On the other hand, the Democratic Party countered, "(Unlike the promotional agency contract) no consignment contract was concluded, and the reason the election uniforms did not sell was because company A set the prices excessively high."

The first trial sided with the Democratic Party. The court stated, "It is acknowledged that during the series of promotional agency contract executions, a Democratic Party official delivered election uniform designs to company A, and company A partially reduced the quantity of uniforms to be produced at the Democratic Party's request," but added, "There is insufficient evidence to conclude that a consignment or delegation contract for purchase agency was made, or that the Democratic Party agreed to bear the cost of leftover inventory."

The court further noted, "Considering that the promotional agency contract was specifically detailed and concluded in writing, it is unusual in commercial practice for a consignment contract to be implicitly concluded between parties without concrete negotiations," and pointed out, "In the case of a consignment contract, even basic details such as the sales price of the election uniforms do not appear to have been determined."

Given that election uniforms lose their utility value after the election day and that the sales price can significantly affect sales volume, the court judged that if the Democratic Party were to bear full responsibility for the leftover inventory, such terms would not have been left undefined in the contract.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.