I personally think that this compensation is legal, since the beating then be responsible.

The deliveryman is in the delivery of takeout on the way to the traffic accident caused by the second degree of disability, so the deliveryman where the platform is in accordance with the provisions of the certain compensation, for this matter also tells us, no matter which line of business, in the work is to be careful, especially deliveryman, every day to drive a battery car in the road to run around, be sure to comply with the good! Traffic rules, do not in order to fast that their lives joke, this time, the takeaway because in the delivery of takeaway on the way to traffic accidents, if the platform does not give the Indian compensation, then this will cause the platform below the rider public anger, thus affecting the normal operation of the platform, the last thing the court in the understanding of the specific situation, the change of the judgment platform side of the compensation of 1,090,000 yuan.

This thing is how.

At 2:36 p.m. on August 1, 2016, the deliveryman was injured in an accident during the delivery process, and the deliveryman was injured in the performance of his duties, which should be the responsibility of the delivery company. It was determined that the take-out clerk's injuries were second-degree disability, and that the period of care and the period of lost work were both long-term. The defendant takeaway company company argued that the company did not have an employment relationship with the plaintiff, and suffered personal injury as a result of completing the delivery service, so it felt that the platform did not bear any responsibility. After hearing the case, the court held that the two parties were in a new type of employment relationship established through the Internet, which was in line with the characteristics of the employment relationship. Therefore, the court held that the defendant, as an employer, should compensate the plaintiff for the reasonable economic loss arising from this accident. However, considering that the deliveryman did not wear a safety helmet in accordance with the provisions of the case, without a license to drive a misappropriated license plate ordinary two-wheeled motorcycle on the road, their own major fault, so the defendant delivery company should be in accordance with 60% of the responsibility to compensate for the plaintiff's losses suffered in this accident.

My personal opinion on this matter.

I think both parties are responsible for this incident, but the man's responsibility is the main one, he was driving on the road but did not wear a good mask as required, which is very dangerous behavior.