The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).

The grounds of appeal are examined.

For reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court maintained the first instance judgment which accepted the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s main claim and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff)’s conjunctive claim during the period of insurance, on the ground that, due to the Defendant’s mistake in the manufacture of the Crest, the ownership of the Crest among the Crest was not transferred to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff). The defect is included in the defect subject to the guarantee of the instant performance (defect) insurance contract, and that, as a result, the guarantee accident stipulated in the instant performance (defect) guarantee insurance contract occurred due to the Defendant’s nonperformance of its defect repair obligation, the lower court maintained the first instance judgment which accepted the Plaintiff

In light of the records, the above determination by the court below is acceptable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors in finding facts against logical and empirical rules, or in misapprehending the legal principles as to the defects in the performance guarantee insurance contract and the requirements for the occurrence of the guaranteed accident.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.