A woman identified as 'A', who underwent free plastic surgery procedures at a clinic back in August of 2013, is incensed that the clinic is using her name and photos to advertise procedures that she didn't even get. 

'A' had received free facial contouring surgery and rhinoplasty at a clinic on the condition that the clinic would have usage rights for 'before and after' photo examples on their homepage and blog for a total of seven years. 'A' saw no problem with the offer and gave consent for the clinic to use her photos. However, 'A' voiced her concern when the clinic started using her photos for procedures she didn't receive and even used her real birth name to promote their practices. 

'A' protested the use of her photos at the clinic and asserted that the terms they entered into a couple years back were void. She even submitted an injunction at court so that clinic will no longer be able to use her photos. 

In court, 'A' argued, "Using my photos for seven years is an excessively long period, so according to civil law 103 it is deemed null. Civil law 103 states that legal actions formed outside of good moral boundaries, societal norms, etc, are invalid." 

SEE ALSO: Banchans (Side Dishes) are the Best for Meal Prep: Here are some of the Best Banchans to Make at Home

However, no matter how insistent 'A's arguments, it seemed the courts didn't agree. After two months of deliberation, the courts revealed that they have ruled against the plaintiff, explaining, "We can't declare the agreement void because the seven-year period of using the photos doesn't go against civil law 103 nor are there any evidence that 'A' is unfairly at a disadvantage." The courts further stated that even though 'A's photos may have been used for procedures other than facial contouring and rhinoplasty, there is only a slim chance that people will believe she indeed received the other procedures.