Unbelievable Controversy Over a Soup Restaurant That Charges 900 Won for Refusing Side Dishes

A soup restaurant is facing criticism from consumers for offering an option that requires an additional payment of 900 won even if they do not want side dishes when ordering for delivery.

Recently, the controversy has spread as the restaurant's delivery app order screen was shared on online communities.

The restaurant sells a 'Special Careful Soup Set' for 8,000 won. This menu includes a bowl of soup and allows customers to choose one from dumplings, boiled meat, or blood sausage, while stating that side dishes will be provided.

However, during the actual ordering process, several paid options are designated as mandatory choices, leading to consumer dissatisfaction.

The controversy over mandatory options disregarding consumer choice

When ordering, both the cooking and non-cooking options require an additional 2,000 won, and these options must be selected to complete the order.

For taste selection, the regular flavor adds 1,000 won, while the spicy flavor adds 1,500 won, and it is specified that delivery is not possible unless a choice is made.

What is particularly controversial are the side dish options. If side dishes are included, an additional 1,500 won is charged, but if one selects not to include them, 900 won is still added.

As a result, even if a customer makes the cheapest choice for all options, the final payment amount still reaches 11,900 won.

Online communities have been flooded with critical opinions such as, "Does it make sense to have to pay 900 won even if you don't eat side dishes?" and "Wouldn't it be more honest to just raise the price of the soup itself?"

This case recalls a previous controversy involving a pizza restaurant that faced backlash for 'mandatory tips' last month.

At that time, the pizza place required an additional tip of 2,000 won to be paid in order to place an order, leading to widespread criticism. In response, the franchisor involved stated that "the restaurant's franchise agreement has been terminated" and clarified that "a misunderstanding arose from selling the same menu names," promising legal action.

Image source: sns, illustrative images for understanding the article / gettyimagesbank