A well-known dermatology clinic in Gangseo District, Seoul, has closed unexpectedly, leaving customers who purchased memberships without refunds. Victims reported that they received no prior notice of the closure and that the clinic encouraged payments through promotions right up until its closing. The clinic acknowledged that some customers did not receive notifications but claimed the promotions were intended to help existing customers use their remaining credits.
According to reports from Aju Economy, the A Dermatology Clinic in Balsan-dong decided to close on July 31. However, during the closure process, the clinic failed to refund customers who had prepaid for memberships.
As of August 3, Aju Economy identified at least 30 victims, primarily women aged 20 to 50, with individual losses ranging from $100 to approximately $2,000. The total unrefunded amount is estimated to be in the millions of won.
The number of victims and the total amount lost may increase. Victims have pointed out that the clinic did not adequately inform them about the closure and the ongoing rehabilitation process. Some learned about the closure only through a text message announcing the initiation of rehabilitation procedures, while others reported not receiving any information at all.
One victim, identified as C, stated, "I was informed on July 11 that the clinic would close and was told to choose between a refund or treatment, so I requested a refund." Another victim, D, recounted, "On July 24, during my treatment, I was informed of the closure and provided my bank account details, and the clinic confirmed that my refund request was received."
In contrast, victim B described a different experience, saying, "On July 2, when I received treatment, I had no information about the closure. I only learned about it on July 31 when I received a text saying 'no refunds'" and added, "A friend who goes to the same clinic informed me after hearing my story."
The clinic sent a text to customers on July 31 stating, "Due to ongoing financial difficulties, we are unable to process refunds normally. Payments will be made according to a plan through court rehabilitation procedures," and posted the same message at the clinic's entrance.
After the sudden closure notice and the text about the rehabilitation process, victims attempted to contact the clinic but were unable to reach anyone.
C reported, "After applying for a refund, I asked two or three times why the payment hadn’t been made, and I was told it would be processed soon. Even after the closure, they said they would respond through the application and that I shouldn’t worry." However, he expressed frustration, stating he made 60 calls after receiving the rehabilitation text but could not get through to the clinic.
B also noted, "When I first received the text and went to the clinic, I found a notice posted, and the clinic was already closed." The clinic's information was also found to be removed from the internet.
Victims are raising suspicions that the clinic may have induced payments through promotions while knowing it was set to close in June and July.
D shared a KakaoTalk message from the clinic, stating, "The clinic sent event notifications six times in June and once in July through chat rooms," while B claimed, "There was a victim who said the clinic encouraged bank transfers by offering lower prices around June." If the clinic attracted customers through promotions while planning to close, it could raise legal concerns.
A more significant issue is that with the clinic entering rehabilitation procedures, the likelihood of victims receiving refunds remains uncertain.
E stated, "I made a three-month installment payment with my card, and since two months have not been charged yet, I applied for a refund through the installment dispute process. If the card company accepts my application, there may be a chance for a refund," but added, "I’m not sure what will happen to those who made bank transfers or one-time card payments."
Among the victims, B and C made one-time card payments, while D made a bank transfer, leaving their funds tied up with the clinic. Victims are reportedly contacting the Korea Consumer Agency, local health offices, and the Korea Legal Aid Corporation individually for assistance. Some are considering legal action, but the costs are a concern.
Park Jeong-mun, a lawyer at Ilro Law Firm, told Aju Economy, "Seeking assistance through institutions rather than legal procedures can have limitations, making it difficult to receive practical help," and noted that small-scale victims often band together to hire a lawyer for civil and criminal responses.
He added, "If there is an outstanding balance on the installment payment, it can be disputed with the card company, but for those who paid by bank transfer or cash, they will have to seek refunds through criminal settlements or civil lawsuits."
After speaking with Aju Economy, the clinic sent a statement apologizing for the inconvenience caused by the delay in refunds.
Regarding the issue of some customers not receiving the closure notice, the clinic stated, "We decided to end services on July 30 and began notifying customers sequentially from early to mid-July, but some did not receive notifications due to contact errors and system issues. This is a management failure on our part, and we are currently re-notifying customers."
The clinic further clarified, "We operated normally until June, and the decision to close was made in July. The events in July were not intended to collect new payments but to allow existing customers to use their remaining credits. The claim that we accepted payments before closing is not accurate."
They added, "We have been processing refunds within the limits of available funds since the closure, but delays have occurred as funds have been exhausted. We are currently working on transferring the clinic and will do our best to refund as much as possible before rehabilitation, with any shortfall to be addressed through the rehabilitation process."
The clinic estimated that preparing for the rehabilitation application would take 2 to 3 weeks, with about a month until a decision is made, and typically around six months until approval, stating, "Rehabilitation is not a process to evade responsibility but a procedure to maximize repayments under court supervision."
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.