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 the court’s explanation as to this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the following addition to the text of the judgment of the first instance. Thus, it shall be cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

According to the third sentence of the first instance judgment, the following is added to the following: (a) the Plaintiff asserts that: (b) the inheritance system of the mentor and distribution issues are associated with the Plaintiff’s inheritance; and (c) the Plaintiff’s assertion also constitutes a case of persecutioning as a member of a specific social group. However, even according to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed as a case of persecutioning depending on the status of a member of a specific social group, merely because there is a private dispute between relatives and relatives with respect to the inherited property of the ment; and (d) the Plaintiff added the following contents to the third sentence of the first instance judgment of the first instance judgment (as the Plaintiff was prohibited from travel of the mentor due to the social distress of the mentor, to the extent that it is difficult for the Plaintiff to request the protection of the mentor’s judicial authority. However, even if it is difficult for mentor to enter and travel of foreigners as a country of prohibition of travel of Korean people (Evidence No. 5).

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