A 17-year-old boy who bravely rescues a drowning classmate while skipping class and drowns his family member receives 720000 compensation

 A 17-year-old boy who bravely rescues a drowning classmate while skipping class and drowns his family member receives 720000 compensation

The family members of the drowned children sued for compensation

Xiaoleis parents sued that at about 2:00 p.m. on the day of the incident, because there was no management during the class, Xiaolei went out of the school from the inner wall of the campus to play at the barrage under the ownership management of a county water authority. When Xiaoqiang, the son of Li, the defendant, entered the deep-water area and was about to drown, Xiaolei rescued Xiaoqiang from the water, but drowned himself.

The incident belongs to the period when the minor was educated and managed by the school. If the school failed to fulfill the supervision responsibility and let Xiaolei leave the management, resulting in death consequences, it should bear the responsibility of poor management. The water authority has the right to manage the accident department, but it has not set up obvious warning signs, nor set up effective safety protection measures, thus causing the death of Xiao Lei, the victim, and shall bear the corresponding responsibility. As the guardian of the rescued Xiaoqiang, Lis son was born through Xiaoleis risky rescue in danger. Lis guardian should also bear the corresponding responsibility for the result of Xiaoleis death in order to save his son.

Xiaoleis parents asked the court to order the three defendants to pay more than 720000 yuan in total for the death compensation, funeral expenses and spiritual consolation for Xiaoleis death due to their own responsibility.

School: fulfilled the obligation of Education Management

During the trial, the school argued that Xiaolei had violated the schools rules on the management of students daily behavior and the management system of the guard, crossed the school wall and went out to the barrage without permission, and rescued others in the deep water area, resulting in drowning. The school has done its duty of education and management to Xiaolei. There is no case that Xiaolei should bear the corresponding legal responsibility. It is Xiaoqiang who causes the dangerous situation and should bear the corresponding legal responsibility. In addition, the water authority, as the manager of the barrage, has not set up warning signs and taken safety precautions. Knowing that there are potential safety hazards and subjectively having obvious faults, it should bear legal responsibility for its negligence in management.

The school said that it has fulfilled its obligation of education and management to Xiaolei. The school has no tort and no subjective fault. The consequences of Xiaoleis drowning death have no inevitable causal relationship with the schools education and management, and should not bear the liability for tort compensation according to law.

Families of rescued children: responsibility of school and water authority

For the prosecution, the water authority argued that Xiaoleis death was in an open river, and that it had no civil security obligation. The warning slogan no sand mining and swimming in the dam area is written on the wall of the barrage management room, which has fulfilled the obligation of warning. The management of water authority will stop people swimming at the barrage every time they are found at the site. The time of the accident happened to the two students was during the school class, when the students went out to drown and died. As the supervisor of the students in school, more than 10 students went out without permission on the day of the accident. The school did not find it, and there was fault. Xiaoleis death was to save Xiaoqiang. According to the regulations, Xiaoqiang and his guardian shall bear the main compensation responsibility for Xiaoleis death.

According to Xiaoqiangs family members, the school failed to fulfill its responsibilities of education, management and protection during the class, the water authority did not set up a safety warning sign prohibiting passage, and did not take any safety protection measures, which led to the occurrence of the accident, and should also bear the responsibility according to law. According to the law of tort liability, the infringer shall be liable for any damage caused to himself by preventing or stopping the infringement of other peoples civil rights and interests.. If the infringer escapes or is unable to bear the liability, and the infringee requests compensation, the beneficiary shall give appropriate compensation. The school and the water authority shall bear all the liability for tort compensation, and they shall not bear the liability for compensation.

Xiaoleis parents get 720000 compensation. Court: Xiaoleis spiritual wealth is very precious

The court held that the courage to do justice is not only the traditional virtue of the Chinese nation, but also the specific expression of the spirit of the times. It is the strong desire of the masses of the people to advocate the courage to do justice and promote social righteousness. Although Xiao Lei, born in a poor family, is not allowed to escape from school by climbing over the wall, when he sees that Xiaoqiang is going to drown, he goes all out to rescue Xiaoqiang. This feat just embodies the noble quality of saving people and doing what is right and courageous, and at the same time, it also shows the noble and upright spirit of seeing evil, eliminating evil, and saving in danger. Although his family is poor, the spiritual wealth he left behind is very precious.

The school found that Xiaolei didnt report to the superior level by level in time when he was away from school, and didnt stop Xiaolei from going over the wall in time. According to the regulations, the school found or knew the information directly related to the personal safety of the students, such as leaving the school without permission of the minor students, but didnt inform the guardian of the minor students in time, resulting in the minor students injury due to leaving the guardians protection The school shall bear 70% of the responsibility. Although the water authority has written a warning sign in the place where the accident happened, that is, it has foreseen that the river dam may have consequences harmful to others, but the sign is not enough to prevent similar events, and the river dam manager has defects in managing the river dam. As the manager of the river dam, the water authority shall bear 25% of the responsibility. As the rescued beneficiary Xiaoqiang, according to the general principles of civil law, if he is injured due to the protection of other peoples civil rights and interests, the infringer shall bear the civil liability, the beneficiary may give appropriate compensation, Xiaoqiang shall bear 5% of the liability, and his liability shall be borne by Li, the legal guardian.

Finally, the court decided in the first trial that the school should pay more than 450000 yuan to Xiaoleis parents (more than 50000 yuan has been deducted from the advance payment), the water authority should pay more than 180000 yuan to Xiaoleis parents, and Li Mou should pay more than 36000 yuan to Xiaoleis parents.

(function() {vars = + Math. Domain(). ToString (36). Slice (2); document. Write (< divstyle = id = + S + > < div > ); (window. Slotbydup = window. Slotbydup| []). Push ({ID: u5811557, container: s});});); source of this article: beiqing.com Beijing Youth Daily responsibility editor: Li chao_