Boy sues classmate after having teeth broken for not returning copied homework: How does the law judge?
Recently, an incident involving campus violence and legal liability has drawn widespread attention. According to a report by Zhejiang Legal Daily, the Chang'an Tribunal of the Haining Court in Jiaxing City heard a case in which a boy named Xiao Ming was accidentally injured, resulting in a broken tooth, when his classmate Xiao Gang tried to take back his exercise book after Xiao Ming refused to return it after copying his homework. Afterwards, with his father's assistance, Xiao Ming sued Xiao Gang, Xiao Gang's father, and the school, demanding joint compensation of more than 30,000 yuan for medical expenses, transportation costs, emotional distress damages, and follow-up treatment costs. How, then, should the law adjudicate such incidents?
First, let's review the incident. Xiaoming and Xiaogang were classmates. One day during a break, Xiaoming borrowed Xiaogang's homework to copy. When the class representative started collecting homework, Xiaoming still hadn't returned it. In a panic, Xiaogang pressed Xiaoming's head from behind to retrieve his homework, but accidentally caused Xiaoming's face to hit the desk, breaking a tooth. This accident not only caused physical harm to Xiaoming but also led to unnecessary legal disputes between both families.
Legally, although Xiaoming's act of copying homework was improper, it did not directly constitute an illegal act (though some argue that copying homework may violate copyright law, this typically applies to more serious plagiarism and is not the main point of contention in this case). However, Xiaoming's refusal to return the homework undoubtedly escalated the conflict, setting the stage for the subsequent altercation.
In the process of trying to retrieve his homework, Xiaogang, though without malicious intent, acted in an obviously inappropriate manner. He chose violent means to resolve the issue, resulting in Xiaoming's injury. According to the law, Xiaogang's actions constituted an infringement on Xiaoming's physical health, so he should bear primary responsibility. At the same time, the court considered Xiaoming's own fault during the trial, finding that he should also bear some responsibility.
As for the school, based on available evidence, the court could not determine that the school failed in its educational and supervisory duties. Therefore, the school is not liable for compensation in this case. However, this reminds us that schools, as educational institutions, should strengthen legal education and daily management of students to prevent similar incidents from recurring.
Ultimately, the court ruled that Xiaogang should compensate Xiaoming for 80% of the medical expenses. The compensation shall first be paid from Xiaogang's own property, and any shortfall shall be paid by Xiaogang's guardian. Xiaoming shall bear 20% of the loss himself. This judgment reflects both the law's protection of the victim's rights and interests and its punishment of the wrongdoer's fault.
The outcome of this case provides a valuable lesson: when facing conflicts and disputes, we should remain calm and rational, choosing legal and reasonable ways to resolve problems. Violent means not only fail to solve issues but also lead to more harm and disputes. Meanwhile, schools and families should strengthen legal education and mental health education for students, cultivating their legal awareness and self-control, to jointly create a harmonious and safe campus environment.
