If a traffic accident occurs after borrowing another person's ID card to obtain a driver's license, is it considered to be driving without a license?

Hu Moupei, Zhu Moumei, Huang Moujin, Kong Moumin, Wuhan Tengshunda Automobile Transport Co., Ltd., and Chinese People's Property Insurance Co., Ltd. Wuhan Dongxihu Branch Company Motor Vehicle Traffic Accident Liability Dispute

- If a traffic accident occurs after borrowing another person's ID card to obtain a driver's license, is it driving without a license?

Case index

First instance: Jiujiang County People's Court of Jiangxi Province (2016) Gan 0421 Min Chu No. 854

Second instance: Jiujiang Intermediate People's Court (2017) Gan 04 Min Zhong No. 529

Retrial: Jiangxi Provincial High People's Court (2018) Gan Min Shen No. 307

Basic facts of the case

On September 16, 2016, Huang Moujin drove a heavy dump truck along the Shuangrui Line from west to east, and when the car drove to the intersection of Xinhe Central Primary School in Jiujiang County, it collided with pedestrians Hu Yueran and Hu Mouling who crossed the highway from north to south, resulting in a road traffic accident in which Hu Mouling died and Hu Mouran was injured. The traffic police department determined that Huang Moujin was fully responsible for the accident, and Hu Mouran and Hu Mouling were not responsible for the accident.

The heavy-duty dump truck driven by Huang Moujin was purchased by the defendant Huang Moujin in partnership with Kong Moumin, and the vehicle was first attached to Wuhan Chunzhu Yonghong New Building Materials Co., Ltd., and then to Tengshunda Company, and was insured with compulsory traffic insurance and commercial third-party liability insurance of 500,000 yuan in PICC Property Insurance Wuhan Company, and insured without deductible odds. The insured, Wuhan Chunzhu Yonghong New Building Materials Co., Ltd., did not apply for insurance change after changing its affiliated company. The victim, Hu Mouling, was born on August 27, 2011, is a non-agricultural family, and his parents are Hu Moupei and Zhu Moumei.

Because Huang Moujin was under the age of 18, he borrowed the identity information of his elder brother Huang Mougan to participate in the theoretical and practical training of driving a Type B car for car drivers at the Ruichang Xinmin Driver Training School from May 2002 to July 2002, and graduated on July 23, 2002. On July 29, 2002, the Traffic Police Detachment of the Jiujiang Municipal Public Security Bureau issued defendant Huang Moujin with a motor vehicle driver's license of type B, the identity information on the driver's license was Huang Mougan, and the photo was that of defendant Huang Moujin. On July 29, 2008, the transportation department issued a motor vehicle driver's license with A2 to Huang Moujin, and on July 29, 2014, Huang Moujin was issued with a motor vehicle driver's license with A2 quasi-driving, the identity information on the driver's license was Huang Mougan, and the photo was that of the defendant Huang Moujin. On August 28, 2013, Huang Moujin applied for a road transport qualification certificate with his brother Huang Mougan's identity information and his own photo. Huang Moujin has been using the driver's license since he obtained the driver's license with his brother Huang Mougan's identity information. On January 3, 2017, the traffic police department conducted a comprehensive inquiry by the national public security, and Huang Mougan's driver's license information was found to be the driving information of the defendant Huang Moujin. Among them: the file number is 360400531429, the certificate core number is 3620024593740, the basic information is, the name is Huang Moujin, the date of the first license is July 29, 2002, and the address is No. 13, Dapinghuang, Quancun, Yong ××, Jiujiang County, Jiangxi Province, ××Jiangxi Province, and the driver's license is valid until July 29, 2024.

Hu Moupei and Zhu Moumei filed a lawsuit with the court of first instance, requesting that the defendant be ordered to compensate the plaintiff for medical expenses, funeral expenses, death compensation, transportation expenses for handling funeral matters, lost work expenses, spiritual solace and other losses totaling more than 550,000 yuan.

Court rulings

The Jiujiang County People's Court of Jiangxi Province held after trial that: 1. On the issue of whether Huang Moujin was driving without a license. (1) Although Huang Moujin borrowed the identity information of his brother Huang Mougan to obtain a motor vehicle driver's license, Huang Moujin himself passed three months of training in the theory and practical operation of a car driver's Type B car driving and graduated, which can fully show that Huang Moujin has mastered driving skills completely proficiently; (2) The traffic police detachment of the Jiujiang Municipal Public Security Bureau not only issued a motor vehicle driver's license with a quasi-driving type B based on Huang Mougan's identity information and Huang Moujin's photo, but also subsequently issued a motor vehicle driver's license with the driver's license and a motor vehicle driver's license of the quasi-driving type A2, and the public security organ that managed the driver's license confirmed that the driver's license was legal and valid in the previous annual examinations of the driver's license; (3) Because the issuance of a driver's license is an administrative licensing act, once the driver's license is issued, it is effective, and it shall not be revoked or revoked at will without the determination of the public security traffic management department, and Huang Moujin has been using the driver's license until now. In summary, it is not appropriate to determine that the defendant Huang Moujin is driving without a license in this case. 2. Whether PICC P&C Wuhan Company should bear the insurance liability within the limits of compulsory traffic insurance and commercial third-party liability insurance. Regardless of whether Huang Moujin was driving without a license, PICC P&C Wuhan Company should bear the insurance liability within the scope of the liability of the compulsory traffic insurance, so this case is actually whether PICC P&C Wuhan Company should bear the insurance liability within the limit of the commercial third-party liability insurance. (1) Although Huang Moujin borrowed the identity information of his brother Huang Mougan to apply for a motor vehicle driver's license, he participated in and completed the training on automobile driving theory and practical operation and used the driver's license for 14 years, and he completely mastered the driving skills. Huang's driving behavior did not increase the insurance risk of PICC P&C Wuhan Company; (2) The public security organ that manages the driver's license has confirmed that the driver's license is legal and valid in all previous annual examinations of the driver's license; (3) Huang Moujin increased the quasi-driving type with the driver's license, indicating that the driver's license management department reconfirmed Huang's driver's license as valid; (4) Huang Moujin's driving information, including name, ID number, file number, license core number, date of initial application, residence, etc., can be queried in the national public security inquiry system, indicating that his driving qualifications have been recognized by the public security department; (5) From the perspective of the purpose of commercial insurance, the purpose of purchasing commercial third-party liability insurance is to obtain compensation from the insurance company after a road traffic accident, so as to pass on or share its own risks and protect the rights and interests of the infringed party. In summary, PICC Property & Casualty Wuhan Company shall bear the insurance liability within the limit of commercial third-party liability insurance in accordance with the law. Therefore, PICC P&C Wuhan Company's argument that it met the conditions for compensation stipulated in the insurance contract was not accepted because the name and other identity information on the driver's license did not match, and that the insurance company was not responsible for compensation. 3. The question of whether the spiritual solatium should be supported. According to <中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法>the third paragraph of Article 155 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Application, "if driving a motor vehicle causes death or injury or causes major losses of public or private property, which constitutes a crime, the liability for compensation shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of Article 76 of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People's Republic of China", for the death or injury caused by a motor vehicle, the relevant rights holder may claim spiritual solatium in accordance with the law. The argument that spiritual solatium should not be supported is not admissible. 4. For the issue that PICC P&C Wuhan Company does not bear the liability for compensation for failure to apply for insurance changes. According to Article 23 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases of Compensation for Damages in Road Traffic Accidents, "if the ownership of a motor vehicle changes during the validity period of the compulsory traffic insurance contract, and the insurance company claims to be exempted from liability for compensation on the grounds that the motor vehicle has not gone through the formalities for changing the compulsory traffic insurance contract after the traffic accident occurs, the people's court shall not support it", and the insurance company shall not claim exemption from liability for compensation on the grounds that it has not gone through the formalities for changing the compulsory traffic insurance contract. In addition, the change of the insured between the affiliated companies does not increase the insurer's insurance risk, and the insurer shall also pay compensation if the insurer does not go through the procedures for changing the commercial insurance contract, just like the compulsory traffic insurance. Therefore, PICC P&C Wuhan Company's argument that the insured is still Wuhan Chunzhu Yonghong New Building Materials Co., Ltd. and has not made insurance changes and is not liable is not accepted. Therefore, the (2016) Gan 0421 Min Chu No. 854 Civil Judgment was rendered: PICC Property Insurance Wuhan Company compensated the plaintiff for the loss of more than 550,000 yuan in each county.

After the first-instance judgment was rendered, PICC P&C Wuhan Company was dissatisfied and appealed, requesting that the first-instance judgment be revoked and the judgment changed in accordance with the law.

After trial, the Jiujiang Intermediate People's Court held that: 1. On the issue of whether Huang Moujin was driving without a license. The (2016) Gan 0421 Xingchu No. 148 Criminal Judgment of the Jiujiang County People's Court of Jiangxi Province and the (2017) Gan 04 Xingzhong No. 98 Criminal Ruling of this Court have determined the issue of Huang Moujin's driving qualifications, holding that Huang Moujin used the identity information of his brother Huang Mougan to obtain a motor vehicle driver's license issued by the traffic police detachment of the Jiujiang Municipal Public Security Bureau, and the issuance of a driver's license is an administrative licensing act, although the identity information on the driver's license does not match Huang Moujin himself. However, once the driver's license is issued, it is valid, and it cannot be revoked or revoked at will unless it is determined by the public security traffic management department, so it is not appropriate for Huang Moujin to be identified as driving without a license. According to Article 9 of the Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings, the parties do not need to present evidence to prove facts that have been confirmed by a legally effective judgment of the people's court. Therefore, the fact that Huang Moujin is not driving without a license should be confirmed. 2. The issue of whether spiritual solatium should be supported. According to the second paragraph of Article 138 of the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China: "Where an attached civil lawsuit or a separate civil lawsuit is raised to demand compensation for mental losses due to a criminal violation, the people's court will not accept it. Hu Moupei and Zhu Moumei's request for compensation for spiritual solatium by Huang Moujin does not comply with the law, so PICC Property Insurance Wuhan Company should not bear the liability for spiritual solatium. Therefore, PICC P&C Wuhan Company's grounds of appeal were reasonable and should be adopted, and the spiritual solatium of RMB 30,000 should be deducted from the compensation. 3. Whether PICC P&C Wuhan Company should bear the liability for compensation within the scope of compulsory traffic insurance and commercial insurance. Huang Moujin is not driving without a license, and the vehicle he drove was purchased by Huang Moujin and Kong Moumin in partnership, first affiliated with Wuhan Chunzhu Yonghong New Building Materials Co., Ltd., and then affiliated with Tengshunda Company, and insured compulsory traffic insurance and 500,000 yuan of commercial third-party liability insurance in PICC Property Insurance Wuhan Company, and insured without deductible odds. Although Huang Moujin and Kong Moumin did not change the insurance after changing their affiliation, the insured was still Wuhan Chunzhu Yonghong New Building Materials Co., Ltd., but when the vehicle caused the accident, it was still within the effective insurance period, which did not affect the insurance liability of PICC Property Insurance Wuhan Company. Therefore, the (2017) Gan 04 Min Zhong No. 529 Civil Judgment was rendered: the first-instance judgment was partially revoked, and the judgment was changed to support PICC P&C Wuhan Company's appeal claim on mental injury solatium.

After the second-instance judgment was rendered, PICC P&C Wuhan Company was dissatisfied and applied for a retrial.

After trial, the Jiangxi Provincial High People's Court held that: 1. The focus of the dispute in this case is whether Huang Moujin is driving without a license. Although Huang Moujin borrowed the identity information of his brother Huang Mougan to obtain a motor vehicle driver's license, Huang Moujin himself passed three months of theoretical and practical training for car driver B type B car driving and graduated, indicating that Huang Moujin skillfully mastered driving skills. The traffic police detachment of the Jiujiang Municipal Public Security Bureau not only issued a motor vehicle driver's license with a quasi-driving type of B based on Huang Mougan's identity information and Huang Moujin's photo, but also issued a motor vehicle driver's license with the driver's license and an A2 type for Huang Moujin, and the public security organs confirmed that the driver's license was legal and valid in the previous annual examinations of the driver's license. Therefore, Huang Moujin should not be found to be driving without a license, and the criminal ruling of the Intermediate People's Court of Jiujiang City, Jiangxi Province (2017) Gan 04 Xingzhong No. 98, which has already taken legal effect, believes that it is not appropriate to determine that Huang Moujin is driving without a license. Therefore, the first and second instance trials found that Huang Moujin was not driving without a license, and the facts were correct. During the review by this court, the Wuhan Company of Finance and Insurance provided new evidence: on October 28, 2016, the Traffic Management Detachment of the Jiujiang Municipal Public Security Bureau issued the Jiu Bus Withdrawal Zi (2016) No. 001 "Decision on the Revocation of Motor Vehicle Registration and Driving License by the Public Security Traffic Management", and the administrative judgment of the Yongxiu County People's Court (2017) Gan 0425 Xingchu No. 30 on October 29, 2017, proving that Huang Moujin's motor vehicle driving license had been revoked, and the administrative act of the Traffic Management Detachment of the Jiujiang Municipal Public Security Bureau in issuing Huang Mougan's driver's license was illegal. Because the facts reflected in the two new pieces of evidence both occurred after the traffic accident in this case, it cannot be determined that Huang Moujin was driving without a license when the traffic accident occurred in this case. The Wuhan Company of Finance and Insurance proposed that once the driver's license was revoked, it would be invalid from the beginning, and Huang Moujin was driving without a license, which lacked factual and legal basis, and the reason could not be established and was not adopted. Therefore, the (2018) Gan Min Shen No. 307 Civil Ruling was made, rejecting PICC P&C Wuhan Company's application for retrial.

Transferred from Falu Idiot