In Guangzhou, Guangdong, a man lent a motorcycle worth nearly 600,000 yuan to a friend who had just bought it for a few days. But the friend not only posted on Moments to show off everywhere, but also left the motorcycle in front of the man's house and threw the car keys into the house on the grounds that he was in a hurry. After the man found out that the motorcycle was stolen, he took his friend to court and claimed nearly 600,000 yuan.
*: Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court, Guangdong).
The man Li has a solid family background, is a famous motorcycle enthusiast, and also joined the motorcycle enthusiast formed by his friends*** Usually Li often exchanges professional knowledge with like-minded enthusiasts in the group, organizes to play together.
After Li played with Zhang Mou, a member of the group, offline many times, the two added WeChat friends to each other, and they often exchanged their opinions on locomotives.
When Zhang learned that Li had just bought a ** motorcycle worth nearly 600,000 yuan, he was envious, and said that he wanted to borrow it for a few days to experience it.
At first, Li was a little hesitant, after all, men's cars are generally reluctant to lend to others, so as to avoid unnecessary disputes.
However, Li didn't know how to refuse, and Zhang promised to compensate for the damage, and Zhang's family also operated several factories, and he was a locomotive enthusiast recognized by the group as having a certain economic strength.
In the end, Li still agreed to lend the car to Zhang for a few days.
But what Li didn't expect was that after Zhang got the car, he posted ** on Moments every day, and he didn't say that he borrowed it when others asked him.
In order to avoid embarrassment, Zhang also deliberately set up a hidden function for the real owner Li.
However, after Li learned about this from his group friends, not only did he not get angry about it, but he also did not blame Zhang, thinking that the car was not damaged.
On the day when the two agreed to return the car, Zhang claimed that he could only return the car after dinner on the grounds that he was not available during the day, and Li agreed.
At about 8 o'clock in the evening, after Zhang drove a motorcycle to the door of Li's house, because Li was still eating out, he parked the motorcycle at the door of his house, and threw the car keys into Li's house on the grounds that someone was coming to pick me up and was in a hurry. Afterwards, Zhang recorded ** and sent it directly to Li.
But who would have thought that after Li returned home, he didn't find the motorcycle. After contacting Zhang, he insisted that the motorcycle had been parked at the door, and said that he had sent ** before. Li called the police for help on the spot.
Although after the police filed a criminal case for theft and investigated, they found that Zhang was ridden away not long after he left, but this person had a certain sense of anti-investigation, and the police did not catch anyone for a while.
However, Li did not want to wait any longer, and insisted that Zhang did not lock and keep the car properly, which means that he was at fault and should be held responsible.
After Zhang learned that Li asked him for compensation, he said on the spot that he would compensate in full if he didn't see it. But now it's not that he doesn't see it in his hands, and he will never be the wronged leader.
After the negotiation between the two parties failed, Li sued the court and claimed nearly 600,000 yuan.
After receiving the court summons, Zhang immediately raised an objection, claiming that the matter had been filed criminally, and the responsibility could not be determined until the results came out.
Article 130 of the Minutes of the National Conference on the Trial of Civil and Commercial Cases by Courts stipulates that when a court hears a civil or commercial case, if the civil or commercial case must be based on the trial results of the relevant criminal case, and the criminal case has not yet been concluded, it shall rule to suspend the litigation in accordance with the provisions of Article 150, Paragraph 5 of the Civil Procedure Law. After the conclusion of the criminal case, the trial of civil and commercial cases will resume. If the civil and commercial case does not have to be based on the outcome of the relevant criminal case, the commercial case shall continue to be heard.
The court held that the evidence in the case could prove that it was a gratuitous borrowing contract relationship, and that Zhang had the obligation to return it unconditionally, and that this case was not a situation where "the trial results of the relevant criminal case must be based".
In other words, it doesn't matter whether someone is caught or not, what matters is whether Zhang fulfilled his duty of care when returning the motorcycle.
After the trial, the court of first instance held that the motorcycle was movable property and that the movable property should be legally effective at the time of delivery. Therefore, if the motorcycle and keys are not delivered to Li, it should be deemed that they have not been delivered.
Article 224 of the Civil Code stipulates that the creation and transfer of movable property rights shall take effect upon delivery, unless otherwise provided by law.
That is to say, in terms of the form of movable property delivery, Zhang has not returned the motorcycle to Li, so Zhang should first bear the liability for compensation and compensate Li for the economic loss of 600,000 yuan of the new car.
But after the first-instance verdict was announced, Zhang said when he appealed that he had already taken a ** and sent it to Li, and clearly informed the other party that he had something to leave first, the motorcycle was parked at the door, and the car keys were thrown into the house.
Article 140 of the Civil Code stipulates that the actor may express or implicitly express his intentions. Silence can only be regarded as an expression of intent if there is a legal provision, an agreement between the parties or a conformity with the Xi of transactions between the parties.
Zhang's meaning is very clear, if Li does not agree to do this, he will refuse on the spot, and if he does not refuse, he will acquiesce and should be deemed to have been delivered.
However, the court of second instance held that this could not be regarded as delivery, but Li did not refuse at the first time, and there was also a certain degree of fault liability.
Article 1173 of the Civil Code stipulates that if the infringed party is at fault for the occurrence or expansion of the same damage, the liability of the infringer may be reduced.
The court of second instance also held that although Zhang did not immediately refuse to put forward a rebuttal opinion on the grounds that he did not look at the mobile phone at that time, he failed to submit evidence to prove it, so the opinion was not accepted, so according to the degree of fault of both parties in this case, the second instance court changed the judgment that Zhang should bear 80% of the responsibility.
Follow @Juan's opinion!Let's look at life and learn legal knowledge from practical cases!(Note: **Unrelated).