1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added in the trial are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. The reasoning of the judgment that this court uses with respect to the plaintiff's main claim is identical to that of the defendant among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Plaintiff’s assertion in the first instance trial that “The Plaintiff’s purchase of real estate in this case was both the Plaintiff’s money or the source of its financing was derived solely from the Plaintiff, and as long as so, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff was entrusted to the Defendant, his father’s husband and wife’s title and registration title while purchasing the said real estate from E. As such, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff was entrusted to the Defendant, his father and wife.” Even if considering the assertion as to the partial supplement in the first instance trial and the additionally submitted evidence Nos. 9 through 14 (including the number of pages), it appears that most of the purchase funds of this case’s real estate in this case were derived from the property jointly created during the marital life, but above all, considering the circumstances indicated by the first instance court, the Defendant was the only child of the Plaintiff’s husband and wife in 1977, and there is no reasonable ground to conclude that the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was concluded as the gift of real estate in this case’s name on the ground that it purchased the real estate in this case’s name.”