My Tricycle Lu Fushan is a human-powered tricycle driver in Xi'an and operates without a license.

The tricycle was confiscated by the Xi'an Traffic Police Detachment based on a notice from the Xi'an Public Security Bureau.

Lu read the Public Security Management Punishment Regulations, which stated that non-motor vehicle violations should be fined less than 5 yuan, and believed that the Xi'an Traffic Police Detachment should return his tricycle, and he has been working hard for this for five years.

Experts believe that the Xi'an Public Security Bureau's notice is only a local administrative regulation. It cannot violate the national public security management penalty regulations, so it is illegal and invalid.

The final verdict was given to Lu Shengli, and the traffic police returned his tricycle.

In view of the situation where the punishment is too light, the National People's Congress is revising the regulations on public security management penalties.

Very related: An employer in Fuzhou City often abused the nanny at home, and one day he beat the nanny to death.

In order to destroy the body and eliminate traces of it, the employer's wife pretended to be the nanny's sister and cremated the body.

The court ruled that the employer's intentional injury was subject to a suspended death sentence, and the wife's cover-up was sentenced to 3 years in prison.

Experts analyze that the relationship between employer and nanny is not that of master and servant, and the status of both parties is equal.

The country should amend the labor law to protect the legitimate interests of people like nannies who have personal employment relationships. Now their interests cannot be guaranteed in any way.

In addition, in order to restrain the nanny's behavior, the employer should sign a good contract with the nanny, or use the power of judicial organs.

The consequences were really serious. Chen Bing found a thief stealing his bag at the train station and chased him.

I chased him for about 200 meters.

The result was sudden death.

The thief had no physical contact with him.

Sports medicine experts analyzed that he may have died suddenly due to heart problems.

Experts analyzed that there was a causal relationship between the thief's theft and Chen Bing's death.

But it only constitutes the crime of theft.

It can be used as an aggravating factor when sentencing.

The thief was at fault for Chen Bing's death, but Chen Bing's family did not file a civil compensation claim against the thief.

In the end, the thief was sentenced to 4 years and fined 3,000 for attempted theft.

Lao Wu contracted a strange disease and went to many hospitals but could not find out.

Finally, he was diagnosed with cryptococcal pneumonia in a hospital in Nanjing.

Doctors say the disease may be caused by pigeon droppings.

Lao Ding raised a lot of pigeons upstairs in Lao Wu's house. Lao Ding regarded these pigeons as treasures.

Lao Wu negotiated with Lao Ding many times to ask him to demolish the pigeon coop, but Lao Ding disagreed.

Both sides hold their own opinions.

Reluctantly, Lao Wu took Lao Ding to court.

Lao Ding took out an identification document and said that his pigeon droppings did not contain Cryptococcus.

The court held that in this case, one party was concerned about personal interests and hobbies, and the other was concerned about people's health. The two rights were competing, and more attention should be paid to people's health.

Therefore, the court ordered Lao Ding to demolish the pigeon coop within a time limit.

Now Lao Ding’s pigeons are temporarily fostered at a friend’s house.

Experts analyzed that this was an infringement case.

Although it is not illegal for Lao Ding to raise pigeons, he violated Lao Wu's right to health.

Regarding the material that Lao Ding produced, experts believe that firstly, it is impossible to confirm whether the letter-opening agency has the qualifications for appraisal, and secondly, even if it has the qualifications for appraisal, the validity of the material will depend on the circumstances of the case.

Where are you? An 18-year-old boy came to Shenyang with his working parents.

One day, I went to play at Dingxiang Lake with my friends.

But was drowned in the lake.

According to friends who went out with him, he jumped into the lake to save someone.

They said that the man ran away after being rescued. They were only focused on rescuing their friends and did not see what the man looked like.

After pushing the rescued person ashore, the child was knocked into the lake by a big wave and never came up again.

His family's conditions are not good, and he will be his parents' only support in the future.

His father consulted the civil affairs agency and said that he could apply for martyrdom, but the rescued people needed to come forward to testify.

The family had been looking for the rescued person for many days, but the person never showed up.

Later, several lakeside workers were willing to testify for the children.

Experts analyzed that for those who act bravely, the state and society should first compensate them, and the rescued people should bear relatively small obligations.

The state has set up a volunteer fund, and part of the taxpayers' taxes are used to do this.

Today's case is very infuriating.

A 3-year-old child went to a hotel for dinner with his parents.

During the dinner, the child wanted to drink, and the mother went out to buy it, hoping that the child would follow the father. But the child did not want to, so the mother took him away.

Later, the child ran onto the road. A hotel attendant rescued the child, but he himself died in a car accident.

The child's parents initially said they had entrusted the child to the bar, and later said they had entrusted the child to the waiter, but there was no evidence to prove it.

They believed the waiter should be held responsible for the child's injuries.

The two parties went to court, and the court ruled that the driver responsible for the traffic accident should bear 80% of the civil compensation liability, and the parents of the child should bear 20%. The total death compensation was 150,000 yuan. However, the indemnifier objected that the waiter had a rural household registration, even if he worked in the city2

The compensation should also be 50,000 yuan per year according to rural standards.

The Mystery of the Death of an Old Man A 79-year-old man had a dispute with a 30-year-old young man.

Only 10 hours later, the old man died.

The old man's family said that the old man was beaten to death by that man, and the young man said that the old man died of a heart attack.