Why can the hotel be exempted from liability when a mentally ill person kills a guest?

　　【提示】[2] Yang Bing, who was waiting to check out at the front desk, was knocked down by a man wielding a stick and beaten to death within ten-plus minutes. The attacker was a mental patient. Recently, the Tianhe District Court in Guangzhou issued a first-instance verdict, awarding a total of 970,000 yuan in death compensation and funeral expenses, including 100,000 yuan for mental distress damages, to be fully borne by the attacker, Ou.

　　【案例】[3] On March 24, 2012, Yang Bing, a young man from Shandong who was using the weekend to study at South China University of Technology, went to the Jilu Hotel near the school to check out. While waiting to settle the bill at the front desk, a large stick suddenly struck Yang Bing. The 1.8-meter-tall man fell to the ground, while the hotel staff had already disappeared. Over ten minutes later, 27-year-old Yang Bing left this world. What was even more baffling was that the attacker, Ou, then 35, was a mental patient who had no prior acquaintance with Yang Bing.

[4] Subsequently, Yang’s family sued the hotel and the attacker’s family, demanding millions in compensation and joint liability. The court found that Ou, by beating hotel guest Yang Bing to death, should bear corresponding civil liability, paying Yang Bing’s parents 976,000 yuan in funeral expenses and death compensation. Given that Ou was in a state of illness at the time and his parents failed in their guardianship duties, the compensation was to be paid from Ou’s assets, with any shortfall covered by his parents.

After the court session, Yang's parents reached a mediation agreement with the hotel, promising not to pursue any further liability after the hotel paid 228,000 yuan in mediation fees. They also stated that since the hotel bore supplementary liability, the 228,000 yuan already paid could be deducted from the total compensation Yang's family ultimately received.

(New Express)

【Legal Study】Article 18 of China's Criminal Law stipulates: "If a mental patient causes harmful consequences when unable to recognize or control their own conduct, and this is confirmed through legal procedures, they shall not bear criminal responsibility, but their family members or guardians shall be ordered to strictly supervise and provide medical treatment; when necessary, the government shall enforce compulsory medical treatment. An intermittent mental patient who commits a crime while in a normal mental state shall bear criminal responsibility. A mental patient who has not completely lost the ability to recognize or control their own conduct shall bear criminal responsibility, but may be given a lighter or mitigated punishment. A person who commits a crime while intoxicated shall bear criminal responsibility."

In criminal law, mental patients with full or limited capacity for civil conduct who commit crimes must bear criminal responsibility; only those with no capacity for civil conduct are exempt from criminal responsibility. Intermittent mental patients who commit crimes when not in a psychotic state must also bear criminal responsibility.

Correspondingly, civil compensation for a mental patient subject to criminal responsibility shall be borne by their guardian. If the mental patient has property, that property shall be used first for compensation, with the guardian supplementing any shortfall.