In recent years, artificial intelligence technology has accelerated the empowerment of various industries, and restaurant delivery robots have been widely used in catering service scenarios due to their advantages of intelligent delivery and reduced labor costs. Who should be held responsible if a delivery robot collides with someone while performing a delivery task? Recently, the People's Court of Xiangqiao District, Chaozhou City, Guangdong Province concluded a dispute over bodily rights, sounding the alarm for the safe application of smart devices in public places. On March 16, 2024, a minor named Xiao Gui (pseudonym) accompanied his mother to a restaurant in Chaozhou City for a meal. During this time, Xiaogui was running inside the restaurant and was accidentally knocked down by a robot carrying out a delivery task due to lack of avoidance. After the incident, Xiaogui was urgently sent to a local hospital for examination. After diagnosis, he was diagnosed with a left eyebrow arch laceration. After receiving treatment that night, Xiaogui went to the hospital for two follow-up examinations, during which he incurred a total of 470 yuan in medical expenses. The restaurant advanced 441 yuan and waived his dining expenses of 318 yuan on the same day. Due to the inability of both parties to reach an agreement on compensation, Xiaogui's legal representative filed a lawsuit with the Xiangqiao Court. The plaintiff claims that there were no safety signs posted on the walls and floors around the dining area, and the restaurant's safety protection measures were inadequate, failing to fully fulfill its safety protection obligations. The plaintiff demands that the defendant be ordered to compensate the plaintiff for various economic losses, including medical expenses, lost wages, and compensation for mental damages, totaling 13881 yuan. The defendant argued that the plaintiff played and ran around in the store, and the employees had repeatedly reminded their mother to fulfill her duty of supervision. After the incident, restaurant employees accompanied the plaintiff for medical treatment multiple times, during which they paid for medical expenses and waived meal fees. Therefore, we request that the plaintiff's lawsuit be dismissed in accordance with the law. After trial, the court found that according to Article 1165, Article 1198, and Article 1173 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, the evidence provided by the restaurant is insufficient to prove that it has fulfilled its safety protection obligations. As the operator of the incident site, it is at fault and should bear compensation liability. As Xiaogui is under four years old and has no capacity for civil conduct, Li, as Xiaogui's guardian, neglected to take care of him and was also at fault for Xiaogui's injury. Taking into account factors such as the degree of fault on both sides and the degree of involvement in the causal relationship, the court has legally ruled that the restaurant shall bear 50% of the compensation liability for Xiaogui's various losses. Judge Xie Zefen, who handled the case, reminded that for the use of smart devices, operators should fully consider the operational risks of the devices, improve safety measures, such as setting clear warning signs, scientifically and reasonably optimizing the robot's operation route, regularly conducting comprehensive inspections and maintenance of robot equipment, providing safety operation training for employees, and reminding consumers to pay attention to the robot's operation path, effectively ensuring consumer personal safety. Only when both operators and consumers fulfill their respective obligations can risks be effectively prevented and technology dividends truly benefit the public safely. (New Society)