[Case] Ms. Zhang is the owner of a community and has a two-year-old child. As there are few entertainment facilities in the community, Ms. Zhang contacted the staff of the property company of the community and proposed to buy a set of children's slide for the community at her own expense, so that children in the community can play for free. The staff of the property management company agreed with Ms. Zhang's proposal and said that they would make room for the children's slide. Before long, Ms. Zhang bought a set of children's slide facilities (including foot mats) and placed them in the public area of the lobby on the first floor of the residential building. Ms. Zhang's children and other children in the community often go to play. The property company is responsible for the cleaning management of the slide area. When Ms. Liu was passing the hall, she stepped on the foot pad, which was wet and slippery, causing her to fall down and get injured. According to judicial appraisal, Ms. Liu is a Grade 10 disabled person. Ms. Liu believed that the property company did not set up a warning sign for the slippery floor and did not clear up the accumulated water, which led to her falling down. Ms. Zhang also made a mistake in buying and placing the slide. She sued the property company and Ms. Zhang to the court, asking for joint compensation for their losses of nearly 200000 yuan. After hearing, the court held that Ms. Zhang was not responsible, the property company should bear the main liability for compensation, and Ms. Liu herself had faults, so the property company's liability for compensation should be appropriately reduced. [Statement] According to the Civil Code, if the actor infringes upon the civil rights and interests of others due to his fault, he shall bear the tort liability. In judicial practice, the principle of fault imputation is mainly used to determine whether to bear tort liability, that is, the actor needs to bear tort liability only when there is fault. The court held that after the property management company agreed with Ms. Zhang to place the slide, it should undertake the obligations of daily maintenance, management and safety precautions. However, when the floor of the community building hall was wet and slippery, the property company failed to clean it effectively and set warning signs. This work negligence was the main cause of the accident in this case, and it should bear the main liability for the loss of Ms. Liu according to law. As an adult citizen, Ms. Liu should try her best to predict and avoid possible risks, but she failed to check the road conditions in time to ensure safe passage. This negligence is also a certain cause of the accident. She has her own fault and should appropriately reduce the property company's liability for compensation according to law. As for whether Ms. Zhang should bear responsibility, the court held that Ms. Zhang's good deeds should not be given a negative evaluation, and should not bear tort liability according to law. First, Ms. Zhang has no fault. Ms. Zhang purchased relevant facilities for the good purpose of improving the living environment of the community and facilitating children's play in the community, without any subjective intention or fault. Second, Ms. Zhang's behavior has no inevitable causal relationship with the occurrence of the accident in this case. The slide and foot pad involved in the case did not objectively increase the personal risk of residents in the community, nor would it necessarily lead to accidents. Third, it is unreasonable to require Ms. Zhang to bear the liability for compensation because there is no basis in law. Ms. Zhang's kindness and benevolence in purchasing amusement facilities at her own expense should be promoted and protected, and should not be negatively evaluated by the judiciary. Finally, the court decided that the property company should compensate Ms. Liu for more than 120000 yuan. At the same time, the court rejected Ms. Liu's claim for compensation against Ms. Zhang. (Liu Xinshe)