On an online shopping platform, I used a coupon to purchase a range hood at a low price. Upon arrival, I found that there were quality issues and applied for a replacement. However, the merchant processed the return, refund, and payment process. Can the virtual assets be compensated? Recently, the People's Court of Shunde District, Foshan City, Guangdong Province heard a dispute over compensation for information network sales contracts, ruling that the defendant, a technology company, paid compensation of 599.4 yuan to the plaintiff, Li. Li purchased a range hood from an online shopping platform of a certain technology company, with a total product value of 698 yuan. Li reduced the discount by 100 yuan through promotion, offered a platform discount of 10.04 yuan, a coupon of 349 yuan, a red envelope of 138.36 yuan, and paid a gift of 2 yuan. A total of 599.4 yuan was waived, and the actual payment was 98.6 yuan to purchase the device. After receiving the goods, Li discovered that there was a quality issue with the range hood, so he contacted customer service and applied for a replacement, returning the original product to a certain technology company. Due to an operational error by the company's customer service, a return and refund process was directly carried out. Li believed that this caused personal property damage (red envelopes, coupons, etc. used could not be returned) and could not be repurchased at the same price. Therefore, he sued a technology company in court. After the court heard the case, it was deemed to be a dispute over an information network sales contract. Li purchased a range hood worth 698 yuan from an online store of a certain technology company. Due to quality issues, he requested a replacement, but the company directly returned and refunded it, causing Li's discount during the event to be unusable and unable to purchase the same product at a price of 98.6 yuan. The company should bear the corresponding breach of contract liability. Therefore, the defendant, a technology company, was sentenced to pay compensation of 599.4 yuan to the plaintiff, Li. The judge reminds that online sales contract disputes refer to disputes arising from the signing or performance of sales contracts through information networks (such as e-commerce platforms, online live streaming rooms, social media, etc.). If the parties express their true intention through the information network and the other party receives and confirms the intention, the contract can be deemed to be established. Whether the transaction agreement is reached through clicking to place an order on an e-commerce platform, clicking to purchase through a live streaming room, or sending text, images, voice, or other means through platforms such as WeChat, it can be considered that the contract between the two parties is established. In recent years, e-commerce operators have carried out various large-scale promotional activities such as "618" and "Double Eleven" to enhance market competitiveness, commonly using various forms of promotional methods such as electronic red envelopes and coupons. These promotional activities have enlivened the market, but due to the widespread use of automated technology in e-commerce to calculate prices, use red envelopes, coupons, and other methods, it is not easy for ordinary consumers to understand and dispose of, and also accompanied by some issues that harm consumer rights. In this case, due to internal operational errors by the merchant, consumers were unable to purchase the same product again at the activity price. The merchant committed a breach of contract, and the court supported the losses suffered by the consumers. The virtual assets that could no longer be used were recognized as compensation for losses, which can effectively guide e-commerce operators to improve their own business level, service philosophy, and sense of responsibility, and effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, Promote the construction of a legal business environment. (New News Agency)