[Introduction to Case] ​​The insured East China Tank Company and East China Tank No. 2 Company signed the "Construction Project Construction Contract" with the defendant Zhenjiang Installation Company，It is agreed that the Zhenjiang Installation Company is responsible for the work of the entire machine and equipment of the insured's entire factory。The defendant Zhenjiang Installation Company is not transported due to no transportation，Partially subcontracted some projects to the subcontractor Yamin Transportation Company。The above two insureds insured all insurances in the installation project to Ping An Property。During the insurance period，Asian Transportation Company's transportation printer During the process of splitting due to steel wire breaks, the side of the color printed machine flipped down the ground damage。After the insurance out of the risk, all parties commissioned the Panhua Public Estimation Company to start public estimates on insurance loss，Fanhua Public Estimation Company issued a public estimate report to identify insurance liability for establishment。Ping An Property & Casualty Insurance Company paid insurance compensation to the second insurer in accordance with the insurance contract in accordance with the amount of losses calculated by Bet365 app download the public company，After the exercise of the right to claim the claim to the defendant Zhenjiang Installation Company, there is a dispute，So the lawsuit。

Trial，The court of first instance decided that the defendant Zhenjiang Installation Company must pay the plaintiff Ping An Insurance Company。The defendant Zhenjiang Installation Company (appellant in the second instance) of the first instance did not accept the first instance judgment to appeal to the second instance court，The court's judgment revoked the first instance judgment，A appellant Zhenjiang Installation Company was able to win the lawsuit。The appellant Ping An Property & Casualty Corporation (re -audit applicant) in the second instance did not accept the second instance judgment to apply for retrial with the Jiangsu Higher People's Court，The final retrial court revoked the second instance judgment [(2012) Su Shang Zai Zi Zi Zizi No. 0035]，Maintain the first trial judgment。

[Case Evaluation] This case is a guidance case No. 74, which was adopted and approved by the Supreme People's Court Judgment Committee and released on December 28, 2016，It mainly involves two dispute points，First, whether the right to claim the insurance substitution is limited to the right to claim for infringement damage; the second is whether Zhenjiang Installation Company can become East China cans and East China Tank No. 2 Company and Ping An Property & Casualty Insurance Company. The insurer，Therefore, compensation for the right to claim the insurance substitution。

First，Article 60, paragraph 1 of the Insurance Law bet365 best casino games of my country stipulates: "The damage to the insurance target of the third party，The insurer compensates the insured from the date of compensation for the insured，Exercise the right to compensate for compensation for third parties within the scope of the compensation amount。"Based on this，"Third Party" is a person who causes insurance accidents due to damage to insurance.。In judicial practice，Some courts include the court of the second instance of this case all interpreting such damage liability as infringement liability，The corresponding infringement person is the "third party" in this article。Actually，my country's "Insurance Law" does not set the meaning of "third party" directly，But the theoretical insurance law generally believes that anyone other than the insurer and insurer can become the "third party"，In the case of the insured and the insured person，Even the insured，It is not limited to infringer。This basic conclusion is related to the legislative purpose of the right to compensate for compensation。Insurance method theoretically，The main purpose of the right to compensate for compensation for insurance substitution is the main purpose: to avoid the insurer from obtaining double compensation，Prevent moral risk; ensure the responsibility of the person who causes the insurance accident (third party);。If the third party is limited to the infringer，In the case of non -damage caused by non -infringement,，will lead to the consequences bet365 Play online games of the decline in legislative purposes: either the insurer does not claim compensation from a third party，Compensation liability will be finalized by the insurance company，Unable to achieve social fairness and justice; or after the insured accepts the insurance company's compensation，Realize damage compensation to third parties，As a result, the insurer received double compensation，Destroy the principle of "loss compensation" of property insurance。

So，The proper interpretation of Article 60, paragraph 1 of the Insurance Law should be "third party" without limited to infringer，The corresponding "damage to the subject of the third party" is not limited to the damage caused by the infringement。The key to determining whether the third party assumes the obligation to compensate is the causal relationship between behavior and damage and whether it causes damage.，It has nothing to do with the subjective fault of the third party。Combined with this case，The court of first instance and the retrial court gave the provision correctly and applicable，and the court of the Second Trial made inappropriate limit explanations，interpret "third party" as "infringer"，Eventually, the obligation person who has the right to compensate for the substitution can only be the wrong conclusion of the infringer in the case。The second trial judgment on the subjective error element of the contractor Zhenjiang Installation Company is not necessary，Even Zhenjiang installation company is not at fault，It does not hinder the "third party" of the case bet365 Play online games and the obligations of the insurer's substitution.。

In fact，This case is promoting the original French release [2018] No. 13 (now Fa Shi [2020] No. 18) "The Supreme People's Court's explanation on the application of" Several Issues of the People's Republic of China "(4) It played an important role。This article stipulates: "The insurer shall be in accordance with the provisions of Article 60 of the Insurance Law，It advocates that the insured is exercised for the right to compensate for compensation for the insured due to third -party infringement or breach of contract，People's Court should support。"" thus filling the legal loopholes of Article 60, paragraph 1, paragraph 1 of the Insurance Law。

Second，Review Court quoted Article 12 of the Insurance Law to make a judgment，People who point out the same insurance standards with different insurance benefits shall insure the insurance company to obtain the corresponding insurance protection to the insurance company for their insurance benefits。East China Tank Company and East China Tank No. 2 Company The property loss insurance insured based on the interests of ownership insurance cannot replace the insurance that Zhenjiang Installation Co., Ltd. should insure based on its responsibility insurance benefits，Zhenjiang Installation Company cannot become the insurer of all dangers of the installation project。

The theory of insurance interests used in the re -trial judgment theory is called the theory of technical insurance interests。The theory of the early general insurance interests of the Insurance Law of the Mainland Law Department bet365 best casino games only recognizes ownership insurance interests，The theory of technical insurance interests allows the theory of insurance interests from the "ownership"，A variety of interests on one thing are based on different relationships from insurers，Different types of insurance benefits，And the interests of ownership insurance are only one of them。It reasonably explains why the same thing can insure multiple insurances without incurring duplicate insurance and excess insurance，further expand the scope of insurance interests，greatly promoted the development of the insurance industry。Article 12 of the Insurance Law of my country and the original Demonstration [2013] No. 14 (now Fa Shi [2020] No. 18) "The Supreme People's Court on the Application of the" Insurance Law of the People's Republic of China " Article 1 actually absorbs this theory。Fa Shi [2020] No. 1 No. 1 1 specifies the property insurance，Different insured people insured separately for the same insurance label，After the insurance accident,，The insured person is based on the insurance contract that claims insurance compensation in accordance with the insurance contract，People's Court should support。Unfortunately，Review Court failed to quote the original Demonstrate [2013] No. 14 (now Fa Shi [2020] No. 18) as the referee basis，It is really missed。

　　Bet365 app download