Why Tesla Owners Waiting for Their "Dream Car" Are Taking Legal Action [Tesla’s Dominance... Hyundai Strikes Back]

"Full Self-Driving Still Not Delivered After 9 Years,"
Owners Demand Contract Termination
World's First Formal Ruling Expected on Tesla FSD Refunds
Tesla: "We Never Promised a Launch Date... Regulatory Delays Are to Blame"

"People buy a Tesla for the Full Self-Driving (FSD) feature."

It was back in 2020 at a Tesla showroom in Bundang, Seongnam, Gyeonggi Province. Yoonkoo Hwang, Representative Attorney at Law at Dongin Law Firm, still vividly remembers when the sales representative, in a confident tone, said this as he was signing the contract for a Model X. The promise of a 'fully self-driving' world where the car would not only drive itself to the entered destination but even park autonomously—just like the futuristic cars in science fiction movies from childhood. Driven by the anticipation of being able to actually experience such a future, Hwang added the FSD option, which cost nearly 10 million won, without hesitation on top of the vehicle price. The total price exceeded 150 million won.

However, even now, six years later, the FSD option Hwang purchased remains virtually inoperable in Korea. Except for highway driving assistance, the fully self-driving features that were explained at the time have still not been implemented. Even the 'remote control of the vehicle forward and backward in narrow parking spaces'—a basic function that comes as a standard option costing only a few hundred thousand won in domestic cars—does not work properly.

Yoonkoo Hwang, Representative Attorney at Law, Dongin Law Firm.

Meeting with The Asia Business Daily at Dongin Law Firm in Seocho-gu, Seoul, on June 29, Hwang said with a sense of resignation, "In the end, I have never been able to use this 10 million won option even once. All that has passed is time."

After waiting for years for the FSD activation, Hwang, having reached his limit, sent a content-certified mail to the dealership and Tesla Korea, demanding a roadmap for the FSD rollout. The response he received was an irresponsible echo. The reply—bearing only the company seal, with no CEO’s signature—contained nothing but the generic excuse of "government regulation and approval issues." Even when contacting the service center, there was no one who could provide a responsible explanation.

The global giant’s insincere attitude has ultimately led to a class action lawsuit. As soon as Hwang suggested a joint lawsuit on the Tesla owners’ online community, a flood of victims in the same situation quickly joined. Currently, 99 Tesla owners, including Hwang, are participating in this lawsuit. This is how Korea’s first "Tesla FSD Refund Lawsuit Group" was formed. Hwang, who is directly representing the group as their attorney, asserted that the essence of the case lies not in the 'delay in technology development' but in a 'clear breach of contract.'

Hwang emphasized, "Tesla has posted in very small print on its website that the timing of FSD availability may differ according to each country’s regulations. But just because it might be provided someday doesn’t mean consumers have to wait indefinitely. Legally, this amounts to a 'contract with an indeterminate term.'"

He continued, "Although the specific timing of fulfillment hasn’t been specified, this is still a contract under which it must eventually be provided. According to Supreme Court precedent, such contracts must be fulfilled within a 'reasonable period.' The basic warranty period for the car itself is four years, yet Tesla has been selling FSD in Korea for almost nine years now. If buyers are unable to use their option until the end of the vehicle’s life—either scrapping it or selling it second-hand—that is clearly both a default and an incomplete performance."

The ongoing trial since November last year has been centered on whether Tesla ever notified the timing for introducing FSD and whether responsibility for the delay in fulfillment lies with regulatory issues imposed by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. Tesla Korea claims that "there is no definitive agreement in the sales contract stating that level 5 full self-driving capability would be implemented and provided by a specified date," and that "the website informs customers that in some jurisdictions, it may take longer to actually implement the FSD feature," shifting the blame to government regulations for the delay.

In the hearings held this past May, Tesla presented advertisements from its website from 2019 and argued, "The FSD option included features such as Autopilot, automatic lane change, automatic parking, and summon, and a significant portion of these have already been provided." They further pointed out, "If the plaintiffs are demanding cancellation of the entire contract, it is unclear whether they intend to nullify even those features that have already been delivered."

In response, the owners state, "We are not demanding the return of the entire vehicle or hardware, but rather termination of the contract for the FSD software option itself," adding, "We paid over 9 million won at the time, not just for simple Autopilot, but with the expectation of fully autonomous driving."

Tesla Korea's homepage displays a notice related to the FSD feature in the lower right corner stating, "In some jurisdictions, regulatory approval may take longer." Tesla Korea homepage

Regarding recent reports that Tesla may launch an "FSD Lite version" targeting older vehicles with hardware 3.0, Hwang shook his head and called it "a sales tactic that blurs the main issue." He commented, "What consumers bought was the fully autonomous driving option, not a partial version. The Lite version is just a stripped-down simulation without the core functions. Saying the contract is fulfilled by giving us a pumpkin when we paid for a watermelon doesn’t make sense." In the final hearing scheduled for July 16, Tesla is expected to again claim that the introduction of the FSD Lite version constitutes "fulfillment of some functions," and to reiterate that they bear no fault because of government regulation.

At present, dozens of lawsuits are underway around the world regarding Tesla’s alleged misleading advertising about FSD and accidents resulting in death or injury. However, in the United States, due to "no lawsuit and arbitration only" provisions in the sales contract, there have only been refund decisions by arbitration rather than court judgments, while in the UK, the lawsuits have been limited to minor claims. Thus, the case currently progressing at the Seoul Central District Court is likely to become the "world’s first formal panel judgment" on FSD refunds. A verdict could come as early as this fall.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.