1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

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

1. The reasoning of this court’s judgment citing the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following parts which have been partially dismissed. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

(A) The court of first instance is just in finding facts and making a judgment, considering the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of first instance as evidence No. 25-31 submitted by the plaintiff in this court, and there were no errors as alleged in the grounds for appeal by the plaintiff).

Appellant J of the first instance judgment “B” of 5th 8th eth eth son J of the first instance court.

B. Each “this Court” shall be deemed to be “the court of the first instance” of the fifth 9 and tenth 10 juries in the judgment of the first instance.

C. Five 14 pages 14 of the judgment of the court of first instance are “A evidence 2, 16, 29, etc.”

The 8th trial of the first instance court "However, from the 9th trial to the same 9th trial of the first instance court are as follows.

In addition to the whole purport of the pleadings in the statement of evidence A 30, the Plaintiff’s involvement in the process of preparing a delegation letter of property management as of September 4, 2017, and the Plaintiff and the deceased’s visit to the sick room together with the Plaintiff. However, even according to the statement of evidence A 30 itself, Q does not completely state the content that Q participated in the preparation of the instant delegation letter, other than the delegation letter of property management as of September 4, 2017, or confirmed the deceased’s intent as to the preparation thereof, and rather, if the deceased prepares a delegation letter of delegation as to the disposal of the entire property (private donation) even if he/she requested a lawyer’s witness, it is difficult to accept the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff did not make such a request or direction, and the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the process during which the letter of delegation was made is not persuasive.

2. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.