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 the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it pursuant to the main sentence of Article

[Plaintiff asserts that the minutes and contracts of this case are documents indicating the deceased G’s intent of donation. However, in the case of a written donation contract between the parties to the contract of donation, a donor’s intent to give his/her own property to the other party is expressed in writing to the extent that it can be clearly known through a document, which must be expressed in writing to the donee (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 95Da5406, Mar. 8, 1996; 98Da22543, Sept. 25, 1998). However, considering that the minutes of this case are recorded in documents recording the Plaintiff’s towing or progress or the resolution of the members of the meeting or in the capacity of the plaintiff’s president and clerk, it is difficult to exclude the possibility that the act of donation to a religious organization is made on the grounds of interest in writing, i.e., a document stating intent to provide for consideration or the reasonableness of the act, it is difficult to view it as a strict possibility of securing the minutes of this case’s decision in writing.

I would like to say.

In addition, the instant contract also was made between K and the Plaintiff’s representative L, who was the registered titleholder of the instant land, other than G around December 29, 2000, around December 29, 2000, and as such, it is difficult to view the G as a written document indicating the intent of donation of the instant land against the Plaintiff

Therefore, it is intended to make a different purport.