论文部分内容阅读
空军某部政治处褚干事到自己家楼下的一浴池洗完澡后,发现自己锁衣服的衣箱敞开着,里面衣物都没有了,而且上了锁的锁头也不见了,经仔细查看发现衣箱没有丝毫被撬过的痕迹。他立即找来浴池业主说明情况,同时拨打110报警,并配合民警作笔录。褚干事考虑到丢失的现金没有相关证据证明,要求业主只赔偿衣物和衣内其他贵重物品的损失,但当即遭到业主的拒绝。他们认为已在浴池醒目位置贴有“贵重物品交柜台免费寄存,如丢失概不负责”的提示,是褚干事没有看管好自己的东西,才发生失窃事件。在几次协商无果的情况下,褚干事根据在工作中
Dr Chu, a political office of the Air Force, went to a bath in his home downstairs and found his locker open with no clothes inside, and the lock on the lock was gone. After careful examination I found the trunk was not prized marks. He immediately hired bath owners to explain the situation, while calling 110 alarm, and with the police for the record. Taking into account the loss of cash, Dr Chu no relevant evidence to prove that the owners are required to pay only for the loss of clothing and other valuables in the clothing, but was immediately rejected by the owners. They think there is a prominent place in the bath affixed with “valuables to the counter free deposit, if lost is not responsible for ” prompt is Chu director did not take care of their own things, theft occurred. In the case of several unsuccessful negotiations, Chu officer based on work