>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Yin Ruijun v. Yan Likui (Dispute over Right to Health and Right to Body)
尹瑞军诉颜礼奎健康权、身体权纠纷案
【法宝引证码】

Yin Ruijun v. Yan Likui (Dispute over Right to Health and Right to Body)
(Dispute over Right to Health and Right to Body)
尹瑞军诉颜礼奎健康权、身体权纠纷案
Yin Ruijun v. Yan Likui (Dispute over Right to Health and Right to Body) 尹瑞军诉颜礼奎健康权、身体权纠纷案
[Summary] [裁判摘要]
Where the victim in a criminal case brings a civil tort action for personal injury arising from criminal conduct, instead of a civil action incidental to criminal procedure, neither Criminal Procedure Law nor judicial interpretations specify whether disability indemnities are in the scope of material loss. When the victim in a criminal case is disabled by criminal conduct, it will inevitably affect his or her future life and work and result in a decline in his or her work ability, an increase in the cost of living, and indirectly a reduction in material income. Hence, disability indemnities shall be in the scope of material loss compensable. 刑事案件的受害人因犯罪行为受到身体伤害,未提起刑事附带民事诉讼,而是另行提起民事侵权诉讼的,关于残疾赔偿金是否属于物质损失范畴的问题,刑事诉讼法及司法解释没有明确规定。刑事案件受害人因犯罪行为造成残疾的,今后的生活和工作必然受到影响,导致劳动能力下降,造成生活成本增加,进而变相的减少物质收入,故残疾赔偿金应属于物质损失的范畴,应予赔偿。

BASIC FACTS
 
Plaintiff: Yin Ruijun, male, 62 years of age, residing in Tianjiaan District, Huainan City, Anhui Province. 原告:尹瑞军,男,62岁,住安徽省淮南市田家庵区。
Defendant: Yan Likui, male, 58 years of age, residing in Tianjiaan District, Huainan City, Anhui Province. 被告:颜礼奎,男,58岁,住安徽省淮南市田家庵区。
Plaintiff Yin Ruijun sued for a dispute with defendant Yan Likui over rights to health and the person in the Tianjiaan District People's Court of Huainan City, Anhui Province. 原告尹瑞军因与被告颜礼奎发生健康权、身体权纠纷,向安徽省淮南市田家庵区人民法院提起诉讼。
Plaintiff Yin Ruijun alleged that: At approximately 17 o'clock on November 26, 2012, Yin Ruijun had a quarrel with the wife of defendant Yan Likui in the vegetable land in the neighborhood. Yan Likui stabbed Yin Ruijun with a knife to retaliate against Yin Ruijun. Yin Ruijun was taken to hospital for treatment the same day. Yan Likui intentionally injured Yin Ruijun and should be liable for compensation. The suit was filed to request an order (1) that Yan Likui compensate Yin Ruijun for medical expenses, bodily injury appraisal fees, photocopying fees, food expenses at hospital, travel expenses, and clothing and shoe losses, amounting to 13,047. 27 yuan (an additional request upon appraisal for lost wages of 18,283.87 yuan, nutrition expenses of 3,330 yuan, nursing expenses of 15,234.25 yuan, mental distress compensations of 8,000 yuan, and disability indemnities of 46,628 yuan) and (2) that the litigation fee be borne by Yan Likui. 原告尹瑞军诉称:2012年11月26日17时许,尹瑞军在小区菜地与被告颜礼奎妻子发生争执。颜礼奎为报复尹瑞军,持刀将尹瑞军捅伤。尹瑞军当日被送往医院治疗。颜礼奎故意伤害尹瑞军,应当承担赔偿责任。起诉请求判令:一、颜礼奎赔偿尹瑞军医疗费、人体损伤程度鉴定费、复印费、住院伙食补助费、交通费、衣服鞋子损失共计13 047.27元,鉴定后追加请求:误工费18 283.87元、营养费3330元、护理费 15 234.25元、精神抚慰金8000元、残疾赔偿金46228元。二、诉讼费由颜礼奎承担。
Defendant Yan Likui contended that (1) the case was about physical contact caused by a neighborhood dispute, instead of retaliation; (2) Yan Likui had been criminally punished and was liable only for direct economic loss, but not disability indemnities and mental distress compensations; (3) plaintiff Yin Ruijun had no lost wages; and (4) Yin Ruijun only received treatment and was substantially falsely hospitalized, and the inspection materials of the appraisal agency cannot serve as valid evidence. 被告颜礼奎辩称:一、本案系邻里纠纷引起的厮打,并非报复;二、颜礼奎已经刑事处罚,只承担直接经济损失,残疾赔偿金、精神抚慰金不予承担;三、原告尹瑞军不存在误工费;四、尹瑞军仅为治疗,其住院实质是空床挂床,鉴定机构检材不能作为有效证据使用。
...... 
 淮南市田家庵区人民法院一审查明:
 原告尹瑞军与被告颜礼奎同住淮南市田家庵区老龙眼洞泉村。2012年11月26日17时许,双方因小区菜地问题发生口角并厮打,颜礼奎持刀将尹瑞军捅成轻伤。尹瑞军随后被送往医院治疗。后颜礼奎因犯故意伤害罪,被判处有期徒刑一年三个月。2014年8月25日,尹瑞军另行提起民事诉讼,并申请伤残等级、误工期、护理期、营养期及后续治疗费鉴定。法院依法委托鉴定机构作出的鉴定意见认定:尹瑞军的伤情相当于道路交通事故十级伤残,误工期限为180天,护理期限为150天,营养期限为111天;因尹瑞军现在尚无具体的后续治疗项目,不予受理尹瑞军后续治疗费的鉴定。
 上述事实有原告尹瑞军和被告颜礼奎的身份证、病案及相关缴费发票、鉴定意见书和刑事判决书等证据予以证实,足以认定。
 安徽省淮南市田家庵区人民法院一审认为:
 本案的主要争议焦点是:被告颜礼奎应向原告尹瑞军承担的赔偿项目和数额应如何认定。公民、法人由于过错侵害他人人身的,应当承担民事责任。本案纠纷已经刑事处理,颜礼奎故意伤害尹瑞军,应当承担相应民事赔偿责任。另据刑事诉讼法及其相关司法解释规定,犯罪行为造成被害人人身损害的,应当赔偿医疗费、护理费、交通费等为治疗和康复支付的合理费用,以及因误工减少的收入。造成被害人残疾的,还应当赔偿残疾生活辅助具费等费用。被害人或者其法定代理人、近亲属在刑事诉讼过程中未提起附带民事诉讼,另行提起民事诉讼的,人民法院可以进行调解,或者根据物质损失情况作出判决。因此,关于尹瑞军的各项主张:医药费 8737.27元,支持合理部分7171.39元;住院伙食补助费2160元,尹瑞军三次住院合计 111天,参照30元每天的标准计算,尹瑞军的该项主张未超过法律规定,予以支持;交通费1080元,因尹瑞军没有提供相关的票据予以佐证,酌情支持555元;营养费3330元,经鉴定,尹瑞军所需的营养期为111天,按照30元每天的标准计算,尹瑞军的该项诉请符合法律规定,予以支持;护理费 15 234.25元,经鉴定,尹瑞军的护理期为 150天,因尹瑞军未提供护理人员的收入状况,参照上一年度本省居民服务业和其他服务业平均工资37074元每年每人的标准计算,确定护理费的数额为15 235.89元,尹瑞军的主张未超过法律规定,应予支持。尹瑞军关于病案复印费、衣服鞋子损失的诉请不符合法律规定,不予支持;关于鉴定费、误工费的诉请,依据不足,不予支持;关于残疾赔偿金、精神抚慰金的诉讼请求,因其不属于我国法律规定的犯罪行为造成的物质损失,不予支持。综上,尹瑞军在本案中应获得的赔偿款为27 340.64元。
 据此,安徽省淮南市田家庵区人民法院依照《中华人民共和国民法通则》第九十八条、第一百零六条,《中华人民共和国侵权责任法》第四条、第五条、第六条第一款,《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》第九十九条、第一百零一条,《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国民事诉讼法〉的解释》一百五十五条、第一百六十四条,《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第六十四条第一款和《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》第二条之规定,于2015年6月10日作出判决:一、被告颜礼奎于本判决生效后十五日内一次性赔偿原告尹瑞军医疗费 7171.39元、住院伙食补助费2160元、交通费555元、营养费2220元、护理费15 234.25元,合计27 340.64元;二、驳回原告尹瑞军的其他诉讼请求。案件受理费2380元,由尹瑞军负担1896元,由颜礼奎负担484元。
 ......

Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.

1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.

2. Binding to the account with access to this database.

3. Apply for a trial account.

4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【¥400.00】 for your single purchase.
 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
 
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese