2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. The reasoning for this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this case is cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. The plaintiff asserts that, if she returns from the trial of the party to ASEAN, she is placed in a situation where she could be threatened with her life from the third village in relation to the issue of inheritance of property, and therefore, she has repeatedly acknowledged a well-founded fear of persecution to the plaintiff

However, in full view of the facts admitted by the first instance court as seen earlier, there is no sufficient fear that the Plaintiff might be injured on the ground of race, religion, nationality, membership of a specific social group, political opinion, etc.

Even if some of the facts alleged by the plaintiff are acknowledged, it is judged that the plaintiff could avoid the dispute by being protected by the Austrian Government or settled in another area within Austrian.

According to this, the plaintiff's assertion is not accepted.

2. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion shall be dismissed on the ground that the plaintiff's claim is without merit.

The judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable in conclusion as above.

Therefore, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed because it is without merit.