A man died after stealing a farmer’s cow at night. Should the farmer pay compensation? A "special" murder case occurred in Hunan Province. Two thieves stole cattle from a farmer's house at night, and one of them was kicked to death by the cow. These two thieves are local delinquents who often do sneaky things. That day, while the farmer was not at home, he sneaked into the backyard and stole the calf in the middle of the night.
The farmer has two cows, one is a big cow and the other is a calf. At that time, the deceased was pulling the calf out, but was kicked to the ground by the large calf next to him, and unfortunately died. The family of the deceased believed that the farmer's cow kicked the deceased to death and the farmer should bear some responsibility, so they took the farmer to court and demanded compensation of 340,000 yuan.
According to Article 1245 of the Civil Code, if raising animals causes harm to others, the animal breeder or manager shall bear tort liability. If it can be proven that the victim was at major fault, the liability may be waived or reduced.
In this case, the farmer was not at home that day and had two cows locked in the cowshed. The farmer had already taken protective measures. The deceased was obsessed with money and took the initiative to enter the farmer's cowshed to commit theft, resulting in an accidental death, which is enough to prove that the deceased had a major fault.
If the deceased was invited by a farmer and was kicked to death by a cow or died accidentally, the farmer should bear the main responsibility. However, the deceased in this case was originally at fault, and his wrong behavior was the cause of his accidental death. Therefore, the deceased needs to bear some responsibility for this matter, and the farmers do not need to compensate.
Who should compensate the deceased in this case? A thief entered a farmer's house in the middle of the night and was kicked to death by a cow. Normally, this is impossible. It was an accident. The thief's accidental death should be borne by himself, so farmers should not compensate the deceased's family.
According to the provisions of the Civil Code, if an actor infringes upon the civil rights and interests of others due to his own fault and causes damage to himself, he shall bear tort liability. This also shows that the thief's behavior of stealing cattle is wrong and he should bear the consequences himself.
The two have a clear division of labor. The deceased was responsible for stealing the calf, and the other thief was responsible for keeping watch. Their actions were suspected of theft. The deceased was the principal offender and the other thief was an accessory. Both of them committed illegal acts, and the other thief should also bear some responsibility for the deceased.
The deceased colluded with others to steal the calf. As a friend, you should have the obligation to persuade or stop, not to help the deceased steal. The deceased's death was lamented, and he was accused of making careless friends.
The family of the deceased should sue the other thief, not the farmer. Although the farmer is the manager of the cattle, he has taken protective measures and does not have a causal relationship with the death of the deceased.
It is understandable that the family of the deceased should sue the farmers. After all, the farmers' cattle kicked each other to death, but from a moral and legal perspective, the family members of the deceased should not sue the farmers, but should reflect on themselves.
This may not be the first time the deceased committed a crime. The parents of the deceased failed to supervise and guide the deceased, causing the deceased to fall deeper into the trap. As a result, he was kicked to death by a cow for stealing. This mistake originated from the deceased and had a certain relationship with the connivance of the deceased's family.
To sum up, two men entered a farmer’s house in the middle of the night to steal cattle. As a result, one of the thieves was kicked to death by a cow, and the family of the deceased demanded compensation of 340,000 yuan from the farmer. The farmer was not at fault in this case, so he did not need to compensate the family of the deceased.