Kravtsov ordered a wedding suit in the studio. The wedding was to be held on May 15, and the deadline for the execution of the order by agreement between the studio and Kravtsov was set on May 10.
During the tailoring, the detail of the cut-out costume - sleeve - disappeared. Since the material was provided by Kravtsov, and there was no similar material in the atelier, the atelier was not able to complete the work by the deadline. This was reported to Kravtsov by telephone. The atelier offered to make a suit out of a different fabric, subject to the payment of its cost by Kravtsov.
Assuming that the costume will not be ready by the deadline, Kravtsov purchased the finished costume at a famous designer’s shop, and demanded that the studio pay the cost of the purchased costume, compensate the cost of the material transferred to the tailoring studio, pay penalties for the late production of the order, and compensate for the moral damage caused to it. damage, which he estimated at a rate of 10 times the cost of the costume he purchased.
The court charged the cost of the Kravtsov costume purchased from the atelier and estimated the amount of non-pecuniary damage in the same amount. The court refused to satisfy the remaining claims.
Is the judgment correct?

After payment you will be available a link to the solution of this problem in the file of MS Word. It should be noted that the problem solutions put up for sale were successfully handed over in the period 2003-2018 and could be outdated. However, the general algorithm will always remain true.