The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

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

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, this part of the ground of appeal is the purport of disputing the lower court’s determination of evidence and its finding of facts based thereon.

The evaluation of evidence, which is a premise of fact finding and its premise, is within the discretionary power of a fact-finding court unless it exceeds the bounds of the principle of free evaluation

Examining the record, the lower court’s findings do not seem to have erred by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations without exercising the right of explanation.

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment below and the records on the second ground of appeal, Article 22 (1) of the General Conditions for Technical Service Contract (hereinafter “General Conditions”) of the instant contract concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant provides that “the Plaintiff shall bear damages to the technical service object and third parties during the execution of the contract: Provided, That where any cause or event not attributable to the Plaintiff occurs due to the Plaintiff’s non-responsibility, it shall be borne by the Defendant.” Article 23 (1) provides that “vis major means a case where a party is not liable to a contract due to a cause or event such as typhoon, flood, or other bad weather, war or incident, earthquake, fire, infectious disease, riot, or any other situation beyond the control of the parties to the contract (hereinafter “vis major cause”), and this case’s second accident is an accident caused by the destruction of cables, etc. due to a vehicle collision, etc., for which the driver was not identified.”

In light of the above facts, the instant 2 accident is merely a damage caused by a third party’s intentional negligence, but it is merely an accident for which the perpetrator was not revealed.