In July 2021, Qin, who lives in Tianshan District, Urumqi City, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, paid a service fee of 1000 yuan to a marriage agency. The agency promised to provide marriage services for Qin until he found a suitable partner. Afterwards, a certain marriage agency introduced Qin to three romantic partners, but they all did not continue dating because the woman felt they were not suitable. In February of this year, a marriage agency demanded that Qin pay a service fee of 2000 yuan, claiming that they would provide a better romantic partner. After Qin paid the fee, a certain marriage agency recommended two more romantic partners for him, but he still couldn't successfully "hold hands". In view of this, a certain marriage agency requested Qin to renew the contract for 6000 yuan, otherwise they refused to provide follow-up services. In anger, Qin sued a certain marriage agency to the Tianshan District People's Court, demanding a refund of 3000 yuan in service fees. During the trial, Qin believed that as a recharge member, he should enjoy the "lifelong service" offered by a certain marriage agency and should not be charged repeatedly; In addition, the recommended romantic partners by a certain marriage agency have a wide age range and may be "wedding favors". A certain marriage agency argued that the initial payment of 1000 yuan by Qin was a registration fee, and the back of the registration form he signed was printed with the "Fee Standard Agreement", which stated that the registration fee was 999 yuan, and the later service fee was charged according to the service period (3999 yuan for a one-year period and 5999 yuan for a two-year period). Qin enjoyed the marriage agency service but did not pay the relevant fees, and the receipt issued by the marriage agency stated that "no refund will be given for the service provided", so the service fee should not be refunded. The court believes that from the registration form presented by Qin, it can be seen that it belongs to two different contents from the "Fee Standard Agreement" on the back. Signing on the registration form does not represent recognition of the fee standard, and the signature of a certain marriage agency personnel on the registration form and the "Fee Standard Agreement" is different, which further confirms the existence of defects in the contract. The statement on the receipt that 'no refunds will be issued for services provided' is clearly a 'tyrannical clause' formulated by the marriage agency to evade legal obligations and reduce its own responsibilities, and is therefore invalid. So, a certain marriage agency has some mistakes. Regarding the issue of "marriage entrustment" raised by Qin, as Qin failed to provide evidence to prove it, his reason for not recognizing the marriage agency service is not valid. In the end, both parties reached a settlement and a marriage agency refunded Qin 1000 yuan. The judge stated after the court hearing that the marriage service contract belongs to an intermediary contract. According to the Civil Code, an intermediary contract is a contract in which the intermediary reports the opportunity to enter into a contract or provides intermediary services for entering into a contract to the principal, and the principal pays remuneration. In this case, a certain marriage agency introduced 5 romantic partners to Qin, who had fulfilled some contractual obligations. Qin requested a full refund of the fees without factual and legal evidence. Based on the actual performance of the contract and taking into account the principle of fairness, the court facilitated the parties to reach the above-mentioned mediation agreement. (New Society)