All appeals and supplementary appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff, Defendant Hyundai Franchi Co., Ltd.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed) and the grounds of incidental appeal.

1. As to the Plaintiff’s appeal and the grounds of incidental appeal

A. As to the first ground for appeal, the lower court determined that, in full view of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, it is reasonable to limit the liability for damages arising from the nonperformance of the obligation by Defendant Hyundai Flus Co., Ltd, Defendant Korea Electric Power Technology Co., Ltd, and Defendant Hyundai Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co.”), to 35% of the liability for damages arising from the nonperformance of the obligation by the said three companies (hereinafter “Defendant Hyundai

The plaintiff asserts that the above limitation of liability is unfair in the grounds of appeal, but the fact-finding or the recognition of the limitation of liability for the purpose of offsetting negligence or fair burden of damage in the damage compensation case falls under the exclusive authority of the fact-finding court, unless it is deemed that such determination is clearly unreasonable in light of the principle of equity. The above determination of the court below is not considerably unreasonable in light of the principle of equity.

Therefore, this part of the ground of appeal is without merit.

B. Product liability with respect to the second and third categories of products is liable to impose product damage on a manufacturer, etc. in the event of a loss of life, body, or property due to a defect that has a lack of ordinarily expected safety, and “property damage incurred only to the product” is excluded therefrom (Article 3(1) of the Product Liability Act). In addition, “property damage incurred only to the product” includes not only property damage directly generated to the product but also business loss caused by a defect of the product. Accordingly, damage therefrom is not subject to the Product Liability Act.

Supreme Court Decision 97Da26593 delivered on February 5, 199, Supreme Court Decision 97Da26593 delivered on February 5, 199.