In daily life, people in the car neglect observation and rashly open the car door to collide with others, causing traffic accidents, commonly known as "door opening killing". In practice, 'open door killing' occurs from time to time, sometimes even resulting in very tragic consequences. On October 30th, in order to fully demonstrate the leading role of typical cases, the Supreme People's Court released six typical cases of traffic accident liability disputes to the public. It is worth noting that in Case 1, "Zhou v. Chen, Xin, an insurance company and other motor vehicle traffic accident liability disputes", the people's court found that the driver and passenger are both parties to the motor vehicle, and the passenger opening the car door causing damage to others is the responsibility of the motor vehicle. The insurance company should compensate, and the part exceeding the insurance compensation should be borne by the infringer. The liability insurance protection and relief function should be fully utilized to warn the driver and passenger to enhance their safety awareness. The court has clarified that in the "open door kill" accident, the insurance company should bear the insurance compensation liability for the driver and passengers within the scope of compulsory traffic insurance and commercial third-party insurance, and the remaining part should be borne by the driver and passengers in accordance with the law. The case shows that Xin was driving a motor vehicle to carry passengers and did not stop close to the right side of the road. When passenger Chen opened the door, he did not pay enough attention and collided with Zhou, who was riding an electric bicycle, causing Zhou to be injured and the vehicle to be damaged. The public security traffic management department has determined that Mr. Xin bears the main responsibility for the accident, Mr. Chen bears the secondary responsibility, and Mr. Zhou has no responsibility. The vehicle driven by Mr. Xin was insured with compulsory traffic insurance and commercial third-party insurance by a certain insurance company, and the accident occurred during the insurance period. Zhou filed a lawsuit with the court, requesting that Chen, Xin, and a certain insurance company be ordered to compensate for the losses. The trial court held that Xin did not park close to the right side of the road, and Chen did not ensure safety when opening the car door, causing damage to Zhou. The actions of both parties jointly caused the consequences of the damage. For the victim, the motor vehicle is a whole, and both Chen and Xin belong to the motor vehicle. Chen's responsibility also belongs to the motor vehicle. The defense of a certain insurance company that it should not bear insurance liability for the passenger's liability cannot be established. The insurance company should bear full compensation liability within the scope of compulsory traffic insurance and commercial third-party insurance. For the part beyond the scope of insurance compensation, driver Xin shall bear 70% of the compensation liability, and passenger Chen shall bear 30% of the compensation liability. The final judgment of the court: a certain insurance company compensated Zhou for various losses totaling more than 240000 yuan, Xin compensated Zhou for 4200 yuan, and Chen compensated Zhou for 1800 yuan. The Supreme People's Court stated that the verdict in this case not only fully utilizes the role of insurance protection to provide timely relief to victims, but also strengthens the safety responsibility awareness of drivers and passengers, warning them to strictly abide by traffic rules, be cautious and careful, and avoid minor negligence causing major accidents. (New Society)