Yesterday's trial mainly revolved around three controversial issues. First, did the painter commit suicide in the renovated room, causing economic losses to the plaintiff? Second, does this matter cause mental damage to the plaintiff? Third, when this happened, was the defendant "People Decoration" company at fault?
Li Jian said that after this incident, this new house has no use value for him, and it is impossible for him to get married and live in this house. Li even suggested to the judge whether he could investigate in court and ask hundreds of people present if there was such a situation. At the same time, he said that as long as the defendant compensates for the purchase price and decoration fee, this house can be owned by the other party. "People's decoration" argues that the value of the house is only related to the location, room structure and size, and has nothing to do with whether there are people dead inside. The company believes that the value of the house has not been damaged, and does not agree with Li's request for "changing the house".
In court, Li also said that after the incident, he was "haunted by nightmares and delirious" and submitted relevant witness testimony. Although "Renshi" disagreed with his statement and testimony, he also expressed sympathy and understanding for his situation. However, on the issue of fault liability, "people's decoration" insists that they are not at fault. The reason is that the painter's suicide is not a job behavior. Li insisted that this happened during the performance of renovation contract, and "People Decoration" should be responsible for the management of its employees.
Due to the huge differences between the original defendant and the defendant, the mediation failed. The collegial panel adjourned 15 minutes for deliberation, then reconvened and orally made the first-instance judgment. The collegial panel believes that in this case, there is no direct connection between the casualties in the house and the value of the house. Li Wei can provide sufficient evidence to prove that his property has been damaged, and his claim for compensation for the purchase price and decoration price is not supported. For Li's claim for compensation for mental damage, the collegiate bench thinks that it is well-founded in law, but the specific amount needs to be adapted to the actual damage consequences and the defendant's fault liability, so it only supports 5,000 yuan. In addition, "People Decoration" expressed its willingness to compensate the plaintiff for another 20,000 yuan, and the judgment of the first instance was also recognized.
After the verdict, the plaintiff said that he would appeal, while the agent of "People Decoration" said: "The verdict is fair."
Well, I hope it helps you! !