After the incident, the relevant departments of Haidilao responded that this did happen. Haidilao is deeply saddened by this and is actively providing necessary help to his family members, cooperating with his family members and the police to investigate the reasons, and is willing to bear corresponding responsibilities according to law.
Personally, I think Haidilao has no responsibility, but the legal responsibility should be determined by the relevant departments. After the incident was exposed on the Internet, some lawyers expressed their views on the matter, arguing that the division of legal responsibility for the incident should first determine the cause of death of the customer and whether Haidilao had fulfilled the necessary rescue function. If the customer causes physical problems, Haidilao has no fault and no infringement, then there is no need to bear legal responsibility. However, if it is a food problem, the waiter fails to explain the correct way to eat or does not actively help after the accident, resulting in the death of the customer, the restaurant needs to bear the corresponding responsibility.
In the exposure of the incident, we can see that after the incident, a restaurant waiter came forward to help rescue and dialed 120, which shows that the restaurant actively rescued afterwards. As for explaining how to eat vegetables, I personally think it is an insult to the IQ of adults. If analyzed from this aspect, I don't think the restaurant is responsible for this.
However, at this stage, the specific cause of death of the customer has not been notified, and everything should be subject to the announcement of the relevant departments, and the legal liability should also be defined by the relevant departments.
All kinds of accidents in real life always catch people off guard. Maybe everyone should learn some first aid methods, so that in an emergency, they will not be in a hurry and lead to more serious problems.