“海底捞小便门案”判了，涉案者父母赔偿220万元

今年3月，一则海底捞火锅店内有人“向火锅小便”的短视频引发舆论广泛关注。而后，上海黄浦警方发布警情通报，对涉案的唐某（男，17岁）和吴某（男，17岁）作出了行政拘留处罚。

After police detained two individuals for urinating in a hotpot at a Haidilao restaurant in Shanghai — an act that sparked widespread public discussion — a local court on Friday handed down its first-instance verdict, ordering the culprits and their parents to pay 2.2 million yuan ($300,000) in compensation, according to a report on People's Daily app.

据悉，9月12日，法院对原告四川某餐饮管理集团有限公司（以下简称四川某餐饮公司）、上海某餐饮管理有限公司（以下简称上海某餐饮公司）与被告唐某、吴某及唐某父母、吴某父母名誉权纠纷、财产损害赔偿纠纷案作出一审宣判。

The report said that on Friday, the Huangpu District People's Court of Shanghai delivered its first-instance ruling in the case involving disputes over reputation rights and property damage between the plaintiffs — two catering companies from Southwest China's Sichuan province and Shanghai — and the two 17-year-old defendants, Tang and Wu, along with their parents.

法院判决唐某及其父母，吴某及其父母在保护未成年人隐私的情况下，分别在指定报刊上向四川某餐饮公司、上海某餐饮公司赔礼道歉；唐某父母、吴某父母赔偿上海某餐饮公司餐具损耗费和清洗消毒费13万元，赔偿四川某餐饮公司、上海某餐饮公司经营损失和商誉损失200万元及维权开支7万元，共计220万元（唐某、吴某有个人财产的，从本人财产中支付赔偿费用，不足部分由唐某父母、吴某父母赔偿）。

The court ordered Tang and Wu, together with their parents, to issue public apologies to the two catering companies in designated newspapers while protecting the privacy of the minors. In addition, they were ordered to pay 130,000 yuan to the Shanghai company for tableware losses and cleaning expenses, and 2 million yuan to both companies for operational and reputational damages, as well as 70,000 yuan in legal costs — bringing the total compensation to 2.2 million yuan. Where Tang and Wu have personal assets, compensation should be paid from their own property; any shortfall is to be covered by their parents, said the report.

海底捞“退一赔十”后

向侵权者索赔超2300万元

案情回顾：

2025年2月24日凌晨，唐某、吴某在某海底捞门店包间内用餐后，先后站上餐桌向火锅内小便，并相互拍摄视频。

2月27日，吴某将拍摄的视频发布在朋友圈，该视频随即经网络快速传播，引发广泛社会关注和公众舆论。

3月12日，海底捞火锅微博发布道歉声明，称将涉事门店内的餐具全部销毁换新，对整个门店深度消毒，并对事发时段到消毒这段时间内用餐的4109单客户全额退还餐费，进行订单付款10倍金额的现金补偿。

Previously, after police detained two individuals, Haidilao, a popular hotpot chain, issued a statement, announcing that for all 4,109 customer orders placed during dine-in services at the affected store over the 13 days under investigation, it fully refunded the meal costs from that day and provided additional cash compensation equivalent to 10 times the order amount.

3月14日，四川某餐饮公司、上海某餐饮公司至上海市黄浦区人民法院起诉，诉请要求唐某、吴某某及其各自父母公开赔礼道歉，赔偿上海某餐饮公司餐具损耗费、清洗消毒费共计15万元，赔偿四川某餐饮公司、上海某餐饮公司经营损失、商誉损失共计2300万元及维权开支10万元，承担上海某餐饮公司支出的诉讼财产保全责任保险费0.93万元。

当事人及父母需赔礼道歉

并赔偿海底捞各类损失220万元

经审理，上海市黄浦区人民法院认为，唐某、吴某共同故意实施向火锅内小便的行为，在清楚知晓视频公开后可能产生的网络传播效应及负面社会影响的情况下，仍积极追求或放任相应视频公开传播，主观上均有过错，构成对财产以及以侮辱方式对名誉的共同侵权。侵权行为造成涉事包间内餐具及就餐环境污染，给公众造成强烈的观感不适，涉事门店采取全店餐具换新、整店清洗消毒的处理方式，并未超过必要限度，合理费用支出属于财产侵权损失。

After reviewing the case, the Huangpu District People's Court found that Tang and Wu had intentionally urinated into the hotpot. Even when fully aware of the potential online dissemination effects and negative social impacts that could arise from the release of the video, they still actively pursued or allowed the corresponding video to be publicly disseminated. The court held that both were subjectively at fault and had jointly infringed upon property rights as well as reputation through acts of insult, the report said.

The court noted that the misconduct polluted tableware and the dining environment in the private room, causing strong discomfort among the public. The restaurant's response, including replacing all tableware in the store and conducting a full-scale cleaning and disinfection, was deemed reasonable and not excessive, with related expenses classified as property damage.

法院认为，针对自事发起，至涉事门店完成餐具换新、清洗消毒期间的涉事门店堂食消费者，海底捞方面予以全额退款，既是对消费者的合理补偿，也是对自身受损商誉的补救，与侵权行为存在因果关系，属于合理损失范畴。但十倍价款补偿与侵权行为之间欠缺法律上的因果关系，属企业自主作出的商业决策，法院难予支持。侵权行为的负面影响具有持续性，短期内仍会造成企业经营收入减少，此亦属合理损失范畴。

The court also ruled that Haidilao's decision to issue full refunds to all dine-in customers from the time of the incident until the completion of the restaurant's cleaning and replacement of tableware was both reasonable compensation for consumers and a way to remedy its damaged reputation, thus constituting recoverable losses.

However, the additional compensation of ten times the meal price lacked a direct legal causal link to the misconduct and was considered a voluntary business decision by the company, which the court could not support. The court further acknowledged that the negative impact of the misconduct was ongoing, causing a short-term decline in business revenue, which also qualified as a reasonable loss, according to the report.

法院认为，唐某、吴某虽系限制民事行为能力人，但综合案情，两人对自身行为的违法性和法律后果具备认知能力，知晓赔礼道歉的责任内容和法律意义，承担赔礼道歉责任并未超出其承受能力，反而能促使其充分反省，两人一起亦表示同意赔礼道歉。唐某、吴某各自父母对未成年人未尽到监护职责，导致两未成年人实施侵权行为。基于此，法院确定6被告承担赔礼道歉责任。经济损失赔偿方面，依法由监护人承担赔偿责任。

Although Tang and Wu are minors with limited civil capacity, the court found that they had sufficient awareness of the illegality of their actions and the consequences, as well as the meaning of making a public apology. Holding them responsible for issuing an apology did not exceed their capacity and would encourage genuine reflection. Both agreed to make an apology.

The court also determined that Tang and Wu's parents had failed to fulfill their duty of guardianship, leading to the minors' misconduct. Therefore, all six defendants were held jointly responsible for issuing public apologies, while financial compensation for economic losses was to be borne by the parents.

综上，上海市黄浦区人民法院依法判决唐某及其父母，吴某某及其父母在保护未成年人隐私的情况下，分别在指定报刊上向四川某餐饮公司、上海某餐饮公司赔礼道歉；唐某父母、吴某某父母赔偿上海某餐饮公司餐具损耗费和清洗消毒费13万元，赔偿四川某餐饮公司、上海某餐饮公司经营损失和商誉损失200万元及维权开支7万元，共计220万元（唐某、吴某某有个人财产的，从本人财产中支付赔偿费用，不足部分由唐某父母、吴某某父母赔偿）；驳回四川某餐饮公司、上海某餐饮公司其余诉讼请求。

未成年人参与社会活动

应尊重社会公德、遵守公共秩序

两位专家学者对该案的判决结果谈了看法。

上海财经大学法学院副院长、教授朱晓喆认为，从社会效果看，本案判决一方面告诫公众，监护人应承担对于未成年人的行为监督和价值观塑造的首要责任，而未成年人参与社会活动应尊重社会公德、遵守公共秩序，未成年人违法侵害他人权益将引发相应民事责任；另一方面也宣示，企业的正常经营活动是社会经济发展和繁荣的基础，法律应当保护企业免受非法的干扰和影响，任何侵害企业财产利益、商业声誉的行为都应受到法律的制约，司法裁判对于构建公平有序的法治化营商环境发挥着重要的保障和促进作用。

华东政法大学法律学院院长、教授金可可认为，两未成年人故意向原告火锅内小便并拍摄视频上传，致原告商誉受损，主观上分别具有故意、过失。综上，二人构成侵犯财产、商誉的共同侵权行为。而商誉属人格权，按《民法典》第995条可引发赔礼道歉责任。于此适用赔礼道歉，旨在恢复其商誉。判令未成年人赔礼道歉，有助于未成年人认识错误、矫其行止，发挥其教育惩戒功能，颇有必要。两未成年人的监护人未尽监护职责，依《民法典》第1188条承担赔偿及赔礼道歉责任。

来源：人民日报客户端 环球时报

China Daily精读计划

每天20分钟，英语全面提升！