Share the QR code with wechat scanning code < / P > < p > to friends and circle of friends < / P > < p > Author: Wei Wen editor in charge: Tang Liuyang < / P > < p > although the case of "refund one and compensate three" was won, the dispute between Han Chao and Tesla has not stopped. On September 26, Han Chao said on social media that he had received Tesla's complaint for reputation dispute, and Tesla claimed 5 million yuan for economic losses and 50000 yuan for rights protection expenses. On September 28, Tesla China confirmed the authenticity of the lawsuit to the first financial reporter < p > the cause of the incident dates back to 2019. In June 2019, Han Chao purchased a second-hand Tesla Model s through Tesla's official certification. After that, Han Chao entrusted a motor vehicle judicial appraisal institution to test the vehicle and found that there were cutting and welding marks on the rear quarter panel of the vehicle, which was identified as an accident vehicle. Han Chao sued Tesla for selling accident used cars and sales fraud. In the first instance, the court ruled that Tesla company was a sales fraud and refunded more than 1.51 million yuan to the owner Han Chao according to the relevant provisions of the consumer rights law. Tesla refused to appeal. On September 17 this year, the court of second instance still upheld the original judgment of first instance < p > on September 27, Tesla said that it had paid a total of 1518800 yuan to Han Chao according to the outcome of the second instance. Han Chao also said that he had received a total of 1518800 yuan from Tesla in the afternoon of September 27. However, the dispute between the two sides has not ended. On September 23 this year, Tesla applied for property preservation against Han Chao on the grounds of illegal occupation of two scooters and damage to the scooters. After examination, the people's Court of Beichen District of Tianjin ruled that the bank deposits of property under Han Chao's name were frozen respectively, i.e. 539800 yuan and 222800 yuan, totaling 762600 yuan < p > in addition, Tesla sued Han Chao for violating his reputation in August this year, claiming a total of 5.05 million yuan. Han Chao's complaint to the outside world shows that the plaintiffs are Tesla Motors (Beijing) Co., Ltd. and Tesla (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., and the legal representatives are Zhu Xiaotong, global vice president of Tesla and head of Greater China. Tesla filed four claims. First, it ordered the defendant to immediately stop the infringement and immediately delete all infringing content published on Sina Weibo platform and all comments and replies related to infringing content; Second, a statement ordering Han Chao to make an apology to the two plaintiffs on his personal microblog for 30 days and eliminate the adverse effects; Third, Han Chao was ordered to compensate the second plaintiff for the economic loss of 5 million yuan; Fourth, the defendant was ordered to bear the reasonable rights protection expenditure of 50000 yuan for the second plaintiff, with a total claim of 5.05 million yuan < p > at present, Tesla will apply for retrial in addition to the "refund one compensation three" case, and the other four cases are under trial. You Yunting, senior partner of Shanghai Dabang law firm, told reporters: "the" one refund and three compensation "between Han Chao and Tesla The case has come into force in the second instance judgment of the court, and the judgment found that Tesla constituted fraud. Therefore, it is normal for Han Chao to use some critical language to make a negative evaluation of Tesla, and Tesla should tolerate it. However, in Han Chao's microblog, some words have been suspected of constituting insulting language, such as "hooligan" and "spicy chicken" Beyond the scope of normal business evaluation, I think Han Chao may still constitute an infringement of reputation right against these insulting words. However, we think that since Han Chao is the identity of the injured consumer in the "refund one compensation three" case and Tesla is difficult to prove the specific loss, even if it constitutes an infringement, it will not bear high compensation, and the main responsibility is to stop reuse This kind of insulting language. "< / P > < p > with regard to the dispute between Han Chao and Tesla about the scooter, you Yunting said that at present, there is little information available in the public media. It is roughly speculated that Tesla provided the scooter to Han Chao when the used car he bought can not be used, and Han Chao or his relatives caused damage to the scooter while driving the scooter. If this is the case, Tesla, as the owner of the scooter, has the right to claim compensation from Han Chao. From Han Chao's own statement, he is also willing to make compensation. The main dispute between the two sides may lie in the specific determination of the amount of loss, which needs to be reviewed by the court in combination with the evidence