After helping the drunken passenger Baomou to get off the train, Cai, the online taxi driver, fell to the ground when he saw that he was standing unsteadily, but Cai did not stop for a moment and drove away. Then Cai cancelled the order by himself. The next day Baomou was found drowning in the river in front of the exit point. Recently, the People's Court of Chongchuan District, Nantong City, Jiangsu Province, made a judgment of first instance on the case, confirming that the defendant, an online car rental platform company, was responsible for 15% of the compensation, with a total compensation of more than 180000 yuan for the plaintiff. On the evening of December 19, 2021, Mr. Bao ate at a restaurant in Nantong City and drank too much during the meal. After the meal, Baomou asked the restaurant staff to use his mobile phone to place an order on an online car appointment platform because it was inconvenient to operate his mobile phone while drunk. After receiving the order, Cai Mou, the online taxi driver, drove to the restaurant door. After Baomou gets on the train, the vehicle stays in place for a few minutes and then Baomou opens the door again. After about five minutes, Cai got off from the cab and helped Bao get off. After getting off the bus, Bao fell to the ground when he was not stable. Cai drove away without stopping. During this time, Cai cancelled the order by himself. Hou Baomou struggled to stand up from the ground and walked slowly along the riverside road alone. The next day, Baomou was found drowning in the river in front of the exit point. Baomou's family believed that the driver Cai Mou and an online car rental platform company were responsible for Baomou's death, and sued the court for more than 870000 yuan. After hearing the case, the court held that it was the carrier's moral and legal obligation to rescue the passengers in distress. The understanding of the obligation of rescue in the course of transportation should not only include the obligations of the carrier to take care of, remind, warn and other reasonable limits for the safe arrival of passengers after the completion of transportation, but also include the obligations of the carrier in the process of vehicle travel from the conclusion of the contract to the destination. Cai can directly judge that the other party has been in a serious drunken state and is in a dangerous state through his ambiguous words and his inability to stand and lie down on the ground. However, Cai did not take any measures and abandoned them, apparently failing to fulfill his duty of care and care. Based on the legal liability of the carrier, the online car rental platform shall be responsible for the consequences caused by the driver's failure to perform the obligation of rescue. In combination with the facts and the fault degree of the parties, the court confirmed that the online car rental platform should bear 15% of the compensation liability at its discretion. The final judgment was that the online car rental platform paid more than 180000 yuan of compensation. After the judgment of the first instance, neither party appealed. The judgment has come into force. The judge said that Yuan Haofeng, the vice president of Chongchuan District Court, introduced that Article 822 of the Civil Code stipulates that the carrier should try its best to rescue passengers, which is not only the incidental obligation of the passenger transport contract, but also the legal obligation of the carrier. First of all, the carrier's obligation to rescue should not only be reflected in the process of transportation, but also include the carrier's reasonable care, reminder, warning, etc. for passengers before or after transportation. This is also in line with the traditional virtues of the Chinese nation, reflecting the principle of public order and good customs in civil law. Secondly, the best possible rescue means that the carrier should take all effective measures within its ability to rescue the passengers in distress in a timely and reasonable manner according to the actual conditions at that time. However, the carrier should not be excessively demanding, and the requirements for its salvage obligation should not exceed the carrier's reasonable expectation and performance ability, nor should it simply be eliminated