Restaurant Patrons File Suit Over a Fried Egg | Be Korea-savvy

Restaurant Patrons File Suit Over a Fried Egg


An absurd case has occurred in which citizens went to court over a fried egg. (Image : Yonhap)

An absurd case has occurred in which citizens went to court over a fried egg. (Image : Yonhap)

SEOUL, Feb.24 (Korea Bizwire)An absurd case has occurred in which citizens went to court over a fried egg.

House wife ‘A’ (47) visited Seoul with her sister and children. After spending the day shopping, they visited a small restaurant to have a late lunch/early dinner.

A sign saying ‘fried eggs for free after 2 p.m.’ was posted on the door of the restaurant. Hungry after shopping, the sisters and their children ordered food, choosing one dish per person. One of the children ordered ramen noodles.

However, the number of fried eggs served was less than the number of dishes. ‘A’ asked the owner why one egg was missing. The owner answered that free eggs weren’t provided for those who ordered ramen noodles.

‘A’ and her sister asked for another free fried egg for the children, since there was no information posted indicating that free eggs were not offered with ramen noodles. When the restaurant owner continuously refused their request, ‘A’ and her party argued that they could not pay for the other food as well as it did not taste good.

The restaurant owner called the police, and they arrived an hour later. The police arrested ‘A’, and she was fined 500,000 won for ‘yelling for an hour at a restaurant’. After ‘A’ protested, the case was sent to court.

‘A’ complained of the injustice at court. She claimed to have waited silently for the police after there was a short argument, and did not ‘hinder the restaurant’s business’ for an hour.

Witnesses at court also testified that ‘A’ and her party were quiet, and only started yelling after the police arrived. Also, as ‘A’ and her sister claimed, it was true that the restaurant did not inform customers that free fried eggs would not be provided to those who ordered ramen noodles.

The Seoul District Court ruled that ‘A’ was not guilty, as the plaintiff had failed to prove that ‘A’ hindered the restaurant’s business for an hour.

By Francine Jung (francine.jung@kobizmedia.co.kr)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>