Whose responsibility is it for minors to reward online anchors with a lot of money

The payment method for underage live broadcast tipping, Tencent Pay, the third party doesn't know? iQIYI, to put it bluntly, is a platform for watching movies and television Many people don't know that there is also a live broadcast rewarding business After all, we are small in the countryside and don't have much knowledge Minors have now become a large network group While the country is developing the Internet, there is no relevant strict supervision of minors? Is it really okay to rely on parental supervision alone?

Our parents are honestly ignorant! Many people are still in the process of learning and applying the Internet, and sometimes it is not as fast as minors can accept it. The supervision of underage online tipping should fall on the third-party payment platform, and the third party can deliberately set a limit for live broadcast tipping, for example, if the other party is iQiyi, then the payment limit of the day will not exceed 200 yuan, after all, in the eyes of the public, it is a platform for watching TV and movies.

Why are ordinary people regarded as full supervisors when they are underage online supervision??? Can today's kids not play with their phones? There are homework on the phone, there are class group exchanges, and even some recitations are sent**.

Legal Analysis: Minors can get back for tipping online anchors, and minors are persons with limited capacity for civil conduct, and their behavior of tipping online anchors clearly exceeds the scope of their own capacity for conduct, and is inconsistent with their age and intelligence.

Legal basis: Article 145 of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China: Civil juristic acts that restrict the acceptance of persons with capacity for civil conduct for pure gain, or civil juristic acts that are appropriate to their age, intelligence, or mental health are valid; Other civil juristic acts carried out are effective after being approved or recognized by the legally-prescribed person. The counterpart may urge the legally-prescribed person to posthumously recognize Peiwang within 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice.

If the statutory ** person does not make an expression, it shall be deemed to be a refusal to recognize. Before a civil juristic act is recognized, the bona fide counterpart has the right to revoke it. The revocation shall be made by way of notification.

OK. The tipping behavior of minors should be invalid for the following reasons: 1. The tipping behavior does not match the age, intelligence, and daily cognition of minors.

Because minors are young, their understanding of the world is not yet complete, and most of them are live broadcasts such as ** games, and the number of live broadcasts is not necessarily related to their needs for healthy growth, therefore, the reward behavior does not match his age, intelligence, economic ability, friendship and daily needs. In particular, if the amount of the tip is large and exceeds the financial capacity of the minor, it is obviously mismatched, and the parents can claim to recover the money at this time. 2. The act of a minor rewarding an anchor is a disposition under the Property Law, and according to the provisions of Chinese law, minors cannot dispose of their own property except for inheritance or gifts.

Without the consent of the parents, the transfer of property by rewarding the anchor is invalid, and the parents can recover the money in accordance with the law.

Article 145 of the Civil Code stipulates that civil juristic acts carried out by persons with limited capacity for civil conduct are valid for pure profit or civil juristic acts that are appropriate to their age, intelligence, or mental health status; Other civil juristic acts carried out are effective after being approved or recognized by the legally-prescribed person. The counterpart may urge the legally-prescribed person to make a retrospective recognition within 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice. If the statutory ** person does not make an expression, it shall be deemed to be a refusal to recognize.

Before a civil juristic act is recognized, the bona fide counterpart has the right to revoke it. The revocation shall be made by way of notification.

Legal analysis: Huge game recharges and huge "tipping" anchors for minors seriously damage the property rights and interests of minors' guardians, and Nian Wang's loss also greatly harms the physical and mental health of minors.

Legal basis: Civil Code of the People's Republic of China

Article 19: Minors over the age of eight are persons with limited capacity for civil conduct, and the implementation of civil juristic acts is to be carried out by their legally-designated **persons** or with the consent and recognition of their legally-designated **persons; However, they may independently carry out civil juristic acts that are purely beneficial or that are appropriate to their age and intelligence.

Article 20: Minors under the age of 8 are persons with no capacity for civil conduct, and their legally-prescribed persons are to carry out civil juristic acts.

1. You can ask for money back. The specific regulations are as follows:

1) Minors under the age of eight are persons with no capacity for civil conduct, so the expenses spent on participating in online tipping should be refunded.

2) Minors over the age of 8 and under the age of 18 are persons with limited civil capacity, and if the amount spent by the person with limited civil capacity through recharge, reward, etc. is not suitable for their age and intelligence, the payment behavior is an act with pending validity, which can only take effect after the consent or recognition of the legal person, and if the legal person does not agree or does not recognize, the payment is invalid. An invalid civil juristic act is not legally binding from the beginning, and the property obtained by the actor as a result of the act shall be returned.

2. Legal basis: Article 20 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China [Minors without the ability to suppress civil searches] and Article 22 [Adults with limited capacity for civil conduct].

1. What is the validity of the contract entered into by a person with limited capacity for civil conduct.

1. Persons with limited capacity for civil conduct belong to the subject of a contract whose ability to conclude a contract is limited, and in order to protect their interests, when entering into a contract that is inconsistent with their ability to express their will, it should be implemented by its legal **person ** or with the consent of the statutory **person, of course, it is not necessary to conclude a contract that is purely beneficial or a contract that is suitable for its age, intelligence, and mental health status.

2. It should be noted that the contract entered into by a person with limited civil capacity who is not suitable for his age, intelligence, and mental health condition is not invalid, but has a validity to be determined, as long as it meets the other effective requirements of the contract, and the contract is valid after being recognized by the statutory person, so that its interests can be more effectively protected.

3. In order to protect the interests of the counterpart, the Civil Code gives the counterparty the right to demand and the right to revoke.

1) The right to demand belongs to the right of formation, based on the right of demand, the counterpart has the right to urge the statutory person to clearly reply within a certain period of time whether to recognize the act of entering into a contract with limited civil capacity.

2) The premise for the exercise of the right to demand is that the contract entered into by the person with limited capacity for civil conduct has been established, but whether the effect can occur has not yet been determined.

3) The counterpart (the person with the right to recall) may urge the statutory person to make a retrospective recognition within one month, and if the statutory person fails to make an indication, it shall be deemed to have refused to recognize.

4) The right of revocation is also a right of formation, based on the right of revocation, the bona fide counterparty has the right to revoke the contract before the legal person of the person with limited civil capacity recognizes the contract, and the revocation shall be made by way of notice.

5) It should be noted that the enjoyment and exercise of the right of demand is not conditional on the goodwill of the counterparty, and the enjoyment and exercise of the right of revocation should be premised on the goodwill of the counterparty.