1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part of the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant D regarding the works is modified as follows.

1. The court's explanation of this case is the same as the part concerning the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for a new or additional part as follows. Thus, it shall accept it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

【Supplementary or additional parts” (A) Article 12 and 13 of the first instance court’s judgment “ alone” shall be re-written as “only the circumstances, the entry of the evidence No. 13, and the testimony of the witness P of the party trial.”

(B) by inserting the following additions between the 13th sentence of the first instance court and the 13th sentence.

6) According to the results of the written examination by the appraiser Y of the trial court, it is recognized that the writing body prepared 1 and 2 pages of the testament of this case and the writing body prepared 3 pages of the testament of this case are not the same, but on the other hand, according to the above evidence and the statement of No. 1 and the fact inquiry by the Zoo of the court of the trial court, the testament of this case are the same as the copy of the testament of this case held by the plaintiffs (No. 1) and 1 and 2 pages. However, on 3 pages, it can be recognized that the contents of the testament of this case differ from those of the testament of this case while the deceased stated more specific funeral procedures, etc., but it is not changed.

In addition, the contents of the above 1, 2, and 3 of the testamentary document of this case are not overlap and naturally connected. If so, the deceased appears to have prepared the testamentary document of this case within the meaning of supplementing the testamentary procedure, etc. after preparing the previous testamentary document, so it is difficult to readily conclude that the testamentary document of this case is not unified solely with the fact that the testamentary document of this case was not prepared by the same pen, and (C) the two and three parts of the judgment of the first instance court are added as follows.

E. Whether the deceased and the defendant C were in a partnership relationship or not, as the deceased and the defendant C operated each of the above paintings in a partnership with them, they are the K site and buildings, and each of the above paintings.