After the verdict was pronounced in the first instance, Zhou Yangchun appealed to the Changsha Intermediate People's Court. In his appeal, Zhou Yangchun had no objection to the facts and evidence identified in the first-instance judgment. During the trial of the second instance, Zhou Yangchun and his defenders raised objections to some facts and evidence, which did not affect the conviction and sentencing of this case after review. After reading the papers, interrogating the appellant, listening to the opinions of defenders and procuratorial organs, Changsha Intermediate People's Court considered that the facts of the case were clear and decided not to hold a trial in the second instance in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law.
The court found through trial that the appellant Zhou Yangchun, a contracted driver of Shenzhen Yi Shi Cargo Lala Technology Co., Ltd., drove to the appointed place at 20: 38 on the afternoon of February 6, 20021year after receiving the moving instruction from the victim Che Moumou through the platform. Due to the long waiting time for loading, and Che Moumou refused to accept paid loading service and paid the delay waiting fee, the order earned less money, and Xing Xing was dissatisfied. 2 1: 14, Zhou Yangchun set off with Che Moumou, but did not remind Che Moumou sitting in the co-pilot position to fasten his seat belt. On the way, Zhou Yangchun proposed to Che Moumou that he could provide paid unloading and handling services, but he was rejected again and was dissatisfied. Zhou Yangchun did not follow the route recommended by the platform, and chose a remote route that was relatively time-saving but sparsely populated and dimly lit. Che Moumou found that Zhou Yangchun deviated from the navigation route and drove into a remote section, prompting him to yaw for 4 times. Zhou Yangchun had a bad attitude and had a quarrel with Che Moumou. Carl was so scared that he stuck his head out of the window and asked to stop. Zhou Yangchun found that Che Moumou grabbed the lower edge of the right window of the truck with both hands and leaned out of the car, which might crash. Although he turned on the double flash warning, he didn't take any measures to stop or brake. Subsequently, Che Moumou fell from the window, and Zhou Yangchun stepped forward to stop and dialed the emergency number 120 and the alarm number 1 10. Che Moumou died on February, 20265438 10 due to severe head injury caused by head collision with the ground. After the incident, the cargo Lala company paid the parents of the car medical expenses, funeral expenses and other expenses.
The Changsha Intermediate People's Court held through trial that the appellant Zhou Yangchun refused to accept the long waiting time for loading after the platform received the order and the two paid handling services proposed. In the process of transportation service, it had a bad attitude, quarreled with Che Moumou, ignored Che Moumou's opposition to yaw four times, and insisted on driving into a remote road with few people and cars and dim lights at 9 o'clock in the evening, causing psychological panic to Che Moumou. When Zhou Yangchun found that Che Moumou leaned out of the car and might crash, he thought it could be avoided and failed to take effective measures such as parking or braking in time, causing Che Moumou to crash and die. As a professional driver with many years of driving experience, Zhou Yangchun failed to fulfill his obligations of safety guarantee and danger prevention caused by his pioneering behavior. There is a causal relationship between his negligent behavior and the death result of Che Moumou in criminal law, which has constituted the crime of negligent death. The judgment of the original trial found that the facts and applicable laws were correct, the sentencing was appropriate and the trial procedure was legal, and the aforementioned ruling was made according to law.
During the trial of the second instance, the collegial panel informed the defender to read the papers in time, listened to the appellant's debate and the defender's opinions, and obtained relevant materials according to his application. The application for the exclusion of illegal evidence put forward by the defender was reviewed and commented according to law, which fully guaranteed the litigation rights of the appellant and his defender.
Legal basis:
The E-commerce Law of the People's Republic of China first established the responsibility of platform operators for violating their security obligations.
Article 13 stipulates that "the goods sold or services provided by e-commerce operators shall meet the requirements of protecting personal and property safety and environmental protection, and shall not sell or provide goods or services prohibited by laws and administrative regulations."
Article 30 stipulates that "e-commerce platform operators shall take technical measures and other necessary measures to ensure the safe and stable operation of their networks, prevent illegal and criminal activities on the Internet, effectively respond to network security incidents and ensure the safety of e-commerce transactions."
Article 1 198 of the Civil Code: Operators, managers or organizers of mass activities in hotels, shopping malls, banks, stations, airports, stadiums, entertainment places and other places of business shall bear tort liability if they fail to fulfill their security obligations and cause damage to others.