In recent days, the “Doggy Incident” in Anyang has raised public awareness, and almost nine issues of Little Lily's Help have failed to solve the problem for the biter, and the owner of the dog has refused to interview or apologize. Now, however, there has been a turn of events, when the owner of the dog was suspended from his post to cooperate with the organizational verification. At the moment, Wang has made an apology, being sincere, with one of the kings, and the leader of one of his units.
Previously, when Leigh was reporting, the dog owner did not admit that his dog was biting and said he did not believe in the surveillance video, while he was a member of the Anyang Market Regulatory Enforcement Unit. Li Li, the defender of human rights, repeated that the owner of the dog had not apologized, but had provided the unit with a written acknowledgement that his dog did bite the elderly.
As a general audience, the author has also been following programmes such as " Little Leigh Help " and " Big Reference " , which, while ensuring the truth, indeed help many people whose legitimate rights and interests have been violated in their daily lives by journalists reporting in the field and standing up bravely.
In the light of the current situation, we would like to believe that the local disciplinary committee has given the injured and society a satisfactory response on this matter. As for the dog's bite, the compensation should be paid and the apology should be made. An apology is not only a moral obligation but also a legal duty under the Civil Code.
Article 179 of the Civil Code provides for specific civil liability, which includes an apology for damages. In the case of violations of the right to personal integrity, the responsibility to apologize should certainly be borne in the same way.
As for the future health problems of the elderly, whether the dog owner continues to be responsible or not, it is legally the case that there is no causal link between the disease and the dog bite. It cannot be said that the owner of the dog must bear full responsibility for any health problems, and vice versa.
Here, of course, the dog owner must be held accountable if there is a causal link between the health problems of the elderly and the dog bite. After all, according to the Civil Code, the owner of a pet who causes harm to a person is liable for it, whether he is guilty or not, unless he can prove that the pet is not himself.
Another problem with this is the dog certificate. A dog can't do that. The reality is that a dog can walk a dog with a dog certificate, which can be said to have a causal link to its bite. Whether this is done intentionally by the person concerned or by a general breach of business will await further notification of the incident.
Of course, if committed intentionally, it would be abuse of authority and negligence and negligence. To the extent of the aggravating circumstances, the act alone does not amount to a crime, although the person concerned may also face disciplinary and professional sanctions. What do you think about that?
Finally, it is to be hoped that Wang has truly realized his mistakes and that all animal breeders will abide by the rules, that they will be reasonably legal and that they will be able to take their own responsibility in cases of animal abuse.