news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

recently, the dayao county court of chuxiong prefecture, yunnan province, published an article on its official wechat account to disclose a traffic accident caused by a shared electric bicycle, which resulted in the death of an elderly man who was crossing the road.

the article shows that when a woman named zhao was riding a shared electric bicycle, she collided with a 60-year-old man named wang who was crossing the road. wang died after failed rescue efforts. the court held that zhao violated road traffic management regulations, drove a shared bicycle on a public road and caused a traffic accident that resulted in one death, and was primarily responsible for the accident. her behavior constituted a traffic accident crime, and she was sentenced to nine months in prison, suspended for one year and six months.

the paper learned from relevant channels that the traffic police department determined that the main cause of the accident was that zhao was driving an electric bicycle through the accident section and failed to observe the movements of pedestrian wang and fail to give way in time; the secondary cause of the accident was that wang crossed the road, did not observe the passing vehicles, and went straight through without confirming it was safe.

in terms of compensation, the article shows that after the accident, zhao had paid 99,800 yuan in compensation to the family of the deceased wang, and the first instance court ruled that zhao should also pay 460,591.15 yuan in compensation. after the defendant zhao appealed the civil part, during the second instance, zhao and wang's family voluntarily reached a mediation agreement, and zhao voluntarily compensated wang's family for losses of 100,000 yuan in addition to the 99,800 yuan he had already paid.

the article published by the above court shows that on the evening of july 20, 2023, the defendant zhao was driving a shared bicycle alone when he collided with a pedestrian wang (over 64 years old) who was crossing the road. wang died after rescue efforts failed. the traffic police department determined that the defendant zhao was primarily responsible for the accident. after identification, it was found that the accident vehicle was a two-wheeled electric bicycle, not a motor vehicle. the steering and braking systems of the vehicle were effective when the accident occurred, and the vehicle speed was 17km/h when the accident occurred. after the accident, zhao paid a total of 99,800 yuan in compensation to wang's family.

on march 21, 2024, the dayao county procuratorate filed a public prosecution, accusing zhao of committing a traffic accident. at the same time, the victim wang's relatives filed a civil lawsuit with the dayao court. after the dayao court accepted the case, it held a public hearing on april 19, 2024 for a joint trial.

after trial, the court held that zhao violated road traffic management regulations, drove a shared bicycle on a public road, caused a traffic accident resulting in one death, and was primarily responsible for the accident. his actions constituted the crime of causing a traffic accident.

the court held that zhao’s traffic accident caused wang’s death and caused economic losses to the plaintiff in the incidental civil lawsuit, and he should bear the compensation liability. a certain shared bicycle company is the owner, operator, and manager of the electric bicycle driven by the defendant zhao, and has a leasing relationship with zhao. the company is not at fault for the occurrence of the traffic accident, and the electric bicycle driven by zhao has been identified as meeting safety technical specifications, so the company does not bear compensation liability in this case. the shared bicycle is insured with accident insurance and platform liability insurance, which insures the rider and the platform’s liability. the bicycle is not insured with third-party liability insurance, so the plaintiff’s claim that the defendant in the incidental civil lawsuit, a certain insurance company, should bear the corresponding compensation liability within the liability limit was not accepted by the court in accordance with the law. the court finally sentenced zhao to nine months in prison for the crime of traffic accident, suspended for one year and six months; zhao was required to compensate wang’s family for economic losses totaling 560,391.15 yuan (in addition to deducting the 99,800 yuan already paid, the defendant zhao should also pay 460,591.15 yuan).

after the verdict was announced, zhao was dissatisfied with the judgment of the civil part of the criminal case and appealed to the chuxiong intermediate people's court. during the second trial, zhao and wang's family voluntarily reached a mediation agreement on the compensation part of the criminal civil lawsuit. in addition to the 99,800 yuan already compensated, zhao voluntarily compensated wang's family for the loss of 100,000 yuan.

if a traffic accident occurs while riding a shared bicycle and causes injury or even death, the victim or relevant rights holder can request compensation from the person who is responsible for the traffic accident. so how should the responsibilities of multiple entities such as the rider, the person hit, the vehicle owner, and the insurance company be divided?

in the above-mentioned court official account article, the judge stated that when a cycling accident occurs, if there is no evidence to prove that the vehicle owner (lessor) is at fault, he should not be held responsible. if the rider operates improperly, such as operating in violation of regulations, riding with dangerous passengers, and causing damage, the rider should be held responsible. if the vehicle owner uniformly insures all of his shared bicycles with an insurance company for non-motor vehicle third-party liability insurance, when a traffic accident occurs, the insurance company should compensate the person who was hit for reasonable losses within the insurance liability limit in accordance with the proportion of liability that the rider should bear. as the infringer, the rider shall bear the compensation liability for the part exceeding the insurance liability limit in accordance with the proportion of liability that he should bear.

hu lei, a lawyer at sichuan dingchi law firm, told the paper that article 133 of the criminal law of the people's republic of china stipulates that anyone who violates traffic regulations and thus causes a major accident, resulting in serious injury, death, or major losses to public or private property, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years or criminal detention; if he flees after a traffic accident or has other particularly bad circumstances, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than seven years; if he causes death by fleeing, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than seven years. the criminal law does not impose special restrictions on the subject of the crime of causing traffic accidents, so motor vehicle drivers, electric bicycles, ordinary bicycles, electric tricycles and other non-motor vehicle drivers, and even pedestrians, may constitute the crime of causing traffic accidents.

"in practice, when hearing traffic accident cases, the people's courts often only refer to the accident responsibility determination letter issued by the traffic police department to make a judgment on guilt or innocence. unless the parties request it, they will not conduct a specific substantive review of the division of responsibilities made by the traffic police department. as long as the accident causes one death or three serious injuries or more, and the perpetrator is judged to bear the main or full responsibility for the accident, the standard for criminal liability has been met." lawyer hu lei analyzed that according to the disclosure of relevant court documents, zhao violated road traffic management regulations, drove a shared bicycle on a public road, caused a traffic accident resulting in one death, and was primarily responsible for the accident. his behavior has reached the level of being held accountable for the crime of traffic accident.