할부거래법상 청약철회 제도에 대한 연구- 사업자와 소비자의 이익균형의 관점에서 -

Abstract

Installment sales are helpful for traders because they promote consumers to purchase goods or services by deferred payment. Consumers can decrease economic burden by stretching the cost of a purchase over a period of time. However, there also are some risks in the trade to both consumers and traders. In the case of installment sales, consumers tend to be subject to the asymmetry of information or impulsive buying. Traders can be damaged if consumers do not pay in time. It is striking the balance between them that is most important in the installment trade. Installment Sales Act of Korea was enacted in 1991 and has contributed to consumer protection through several revisions. This paper indicates that there needs to be some more considerations from the perspective of interest balance. First, The words, use or consumption of goods, which are exceptions to the right of withdrawal, are so ambiguous in meaning. Second, the requirement of ordered goods, which are also exception to the right of withdrawal, is too much rigid. Third, the starting point of withdrawal right is not the receipt date of contract document but the delivery date of goods in case goods are delivered later than the receipt of contract document. This paper doubts the rationale of it because consumers already had the opportunity to inspect the goods and listen to the explanation from the seller. Compared to the past, consumers have been well educated and have much information through internet sites providing comparative information about goods or services. In addition, large traders like department stores or big discount stores have their refund policies which are more advantageous to consumers than Installment Sales Act. Installment sales are not as much coercive or deceptive as off-premises and distance sales. They need not be treated as the same. First, it is desirable that the words, use or consumption of goods, should be deleted from the decree. As examples of the exceptions to withdrawal right, automobiles or other goods requiring installation should be prescribed. Second, even ordered goods should be allowed the right of withdrawal if they can be resold without big damages. Third, the starting point of withdrawal right should be the receipt date of contract document, not the delivery date of goods even though goods are delivered later than the receipt of contract document. In conclusion, this paper indicates that Installment Sales Act should be revised reflecting changes of society and balancing the interests between traders and consumers.