Between A and B reached a practical borrowing contract, according to "the supreme people's court on the implementation of the" Chinese people's *** and the general principles of civil law "a number of issues of the opinion of the" article 126: "borrowing in kind, the borrower asked for the return of the original or the same quantity, quality of the physical object, it should be supported; if you can't return the physical object, can be paid in accordance with or appropriately higher than the return of the market retail price discount. If it is really impossible to return the object, it may be paid in accordance with, or at a price appropriately higher than, the retail market price at the time of return. "Article 127 stipulates: "If the borrower causes damage to the borrowed object due to mismanagement or misuse, the borrower shall be liable for compensation; if the borrowed object itself is defective, the borrower's liability for compensation may be reduced." . Here it is necessary to prove that when A borrowed the object, the object was not defective, that is to say, the defect of the object was caused by B's improper use.
Because, the defect of the article with B's injury has a causal link, according to the "Tort Liability Law" Article 16: "infringement of another person causing personal injury shall be compensated for the reasonable costs of treatment and rehabilitation, such as medical fees, nursing costs, transportation costs, and the reduction of income due to lost wages. Where disability results, compensation shall also be paid for disability living aids and disability compensation. Where death results, compensation shall also be paid for funeral expenses and death compensation." A must bear the legal responsibility, and what needs to be proved here is the size of the loss caused by B due to the defective items.