【正文】 ake the results themselves if they didn’t join insurance. The analysis about the judicial interpretation concerning the underground parking garages reflects some problems and then reflects the problem of hardness in pensation. On the contrary, in China, the responsibility could be divided into three parties for the special proprietary institutions. First, according to Interpretation of Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of the Law in Disputes over the Division of Ownership of Buildings Article 5 “If the developer disposes of parking spaces or parking garages to the owners proportional to the allocation ratio by way of sale, inclusion with the premises, or lease, its act shall be deemed to ply with the provision on “satisfying the requirements of the owners on a priority basis” of the first paragraph of Article 74 of the Property Law.” Therefore, developers possess the parking garages and then, they should undertake the proprietary responsibility .Next, estate managements assume the obligation to repair and manage facilities of the building and they naturally should bear the duty to make pensation to the injuries for their omission according to the contracts or regulations. Though in this case, for some managers, there are not fully accounts or definite and binding rules to do the responsibility. The last, the government are should responsible to the injury for the system of draining off water even they may not pay the real damages. This institution what we are confronting with exists defects obviously. What called the Division of Ownership of Buildings differentiated the articles belonging but it also take the specific liability into misty. Faced with these disputes, it is difficult to make a satisfied solution as the ambiguous duty taker and the amount of damages. That is what we are taking into consideration for what related to the citizen’s interests closely. Then we should talk about some circumstance about the how the parking garages are owned by the master of the automobile. For the owner of the building, they obtain the fields though selling, leasing plementary by developers on the requirement of “be used to meet the needs of the owners above all else.” Another part are sealed, leased or plemented to residents outside of the building by developers with in the related parties or by owners with in the related pretest, out of related parties or the increased parties. In these cases, for the injuries, whether they could been gained the same treatment.For the parking garage could gain through convention by paid or free. Certainly these parts could transfer through contract and the gainer could own the garage by many ways such as buying, renting or plement and so on. While some details should be notice: when the owner obtaining the property, some necessary management burden is also inevitable. However, when the transfer of the right of use has happen, the obligee need not pay the expense of management for the owner should undertake the obligation of maintenance to the lease. While between the lure of the benefit, it is uncertain that whether the develop enterprise could equal and base on conviction to solve the problem of property or use about parking garages. On one hand, develop corporation construct the parking garages the capital retrieving and appropriate profit should be gain, on the other hand, owners’ basement requirement also should be taken into consideration. And for the two parties’ conviction, whether it is selling, leasing or pensation, the otherness between their control force, economy strength and professional experience should be noticed, and should give consideration to the owners’ interest, so as to protect equality and availability among these contracts. Chen