YES
We show the termination of the TRS R:

  app(nil(),k) -> k
  app(l,nil()) -> l
  app(cons(x,l),k) -> cons(x,app(l,k))
  sum(cons(x,nil())) -> cons(x,nil())
  sum(cons(x,cons(y,l))) -> sum(cons(plus(x,y),l))
  sum(app(l,cons(x,cons(y,k)))) -> sum(app(l,sum(cons(x,cons(y,k)))))
  plus(|0|(),y) -> y
  plus(s(x),y) -> s(plus(x,y))
  sum(plus(cons(|0|(),x),cons(y,l))) -> pred(sum(cons(s(x),cons(y,l))))
  pred(cons(s(x),nil())) -> cons(x,nil())


-- SCC decomposition.

Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of

p1: app#(cons(x,l),k) -> app#(l,k)
p2: sum#(cons(x,cons(y,l))) -> sum#(cons(plus(x,y),l))
p3: sum#(cons(x,cons(y,l))) -> plus#(x,y)
p4: sum#(app(l,cons(x,cons(y,k)))) -> sum#(app(l,sum(cons(x,cons(y,k)))))
p5: sum#(app(l,cons(x,cons(y,k)))) -> app#(l,sum(cons(x,cons(y,k))))
p6: sum#(app(l,cons(x,cons(y,k)))) -> sum#(cons(x,cons(y,k)))
p7: plus#(s(x),y) -> plus#(x,y)
p8: sum#(plus(cons(|0|(),x),cons(y,l))) -> pred#(sum(cons(s(x),cons(y,l))))
p9: sum#(plus(cons(|0|(),x),cons(y,l))) -> sum#(cons(s(x),cons(y,l)))

and R consists of:

r1: app(nil(),k) -> k
r2: app(l,nil()) -> l
r3: app(cons(x,l),k) -> cons(x,app(l,k))
r4: sum(cons(x,nil())) -> cons(x,nil())
r5: sum(cons(x,cons(y,l))) -> sum(cons(plus(x,y),l))
r6: sum(app(l,cons(x,cons(y,k)))) -> sum(app(l,sum(cons(x,cons(y,k)))))
r7: plus(|0|(),y) -> y
r8: plus(s(x),y) -> s(plus(x,y))
r9: sum(plus(cons(|0|(),x),cons(y,l))) -> pred(sum(cons(s(x),cons(y,l))))
r10: pred(cons(s(x),nil())) -> cons(x,nil())

The estimated dependency graph contains the following SCCs:

  {p4}
  {p1}
  {p2}
  {p7}


-- Reduction pair.

Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of

p1: sum#(app(l,cons(x,cons(y,k)))) -> sum#(app(l,sum(cons(x,cons(y,k)))))

and R consists of:

r1: app(nil(),k) -> k
r2: app(l,nil()) -> l
r3: app(cons(x,l),k) -> cons(x,app(l,k))
r4: sum(cons(x,nil())) -> cons(x,nil())
r5: sum(cons(x,cons(y,l))) -> sum(cons(plus(x,y),l))
r6: sum(app(l,cons(x,cons(y,k)))) -> sum(app(l,sum(cons(x,cons(y,k)))))
r7: plus(|0|(),y) -> y
r8: plus(s(x),y) -> s(plus(x,y))
r9: sum(plus(cons(|0|(),x),cons(y,l))) -> pred(sum(cons(s(x),cons(y,l))))
r10: pred(cons(s(x),nil())) -> cons(x,nil())

The set of usable rules consists of

  r1, r2, r3, r4, r5, r7, r8

Take the reduction pair:

  generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G)
  
    base order 1:
  
      max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
      
        sum#_A(x1) = max{23, x1}
        app_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 25, x2 + 25}
        cons_A(x1,x2) = max{22, x1 + 6, x2}
        sum_A(x1) = max{5, x1}
        nil_A = 3
        plus_A(x1,x2) = max{16, x1 - 21, x2}
        |0|_A = 1
        s_A(x1) = max{8, x1 - 28}
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          sum#_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 48}
          app_A(x1,x2) = max{26, x1 + 1, x2 + 23}
          cons_A(x1,x2) = max{24, x1 - 7, x2}
          sum_A(x1) = max{12, x1}
          nil_A = 15
          plus_A(x1,x2) = max{28, x1 - 62, x2}
          |0|_A = 25
          s_A(x1) = max{26, x1 - 29}
          sum#!_A(x1) = 0
          app!_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 6, x2 + 34}
          cons!_A(x1,x2) = max{7, x2 + 2}
          sum!_A(x1) = 18
          nil!_A = 22
          plus!_A(x1,x2) = max{20, x1 - 28, x2 + 15}
          |0|!_A = 8
          s!_A(x1) = max{19, x1 - 29}
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(sum#) = [1]
      pi(app) = [1, 2]
      pi(cons) = []
      pi(sum) = []
      pi(nil) = []
      pi(plus) = [2]
      pi(|0|) = []
      pi(s) = []

The following rules are removed:

  p1

Then no dependency pair remains.

-- Reduction pair.

Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of

p1: app#(cons(x,l),k) -> app#(l,k)

and R consists of:

r1: app(nil(),k) -> k
r2: app(l,nil()) -> l
r3: app(cons(x,l),k) -> cons(x,app(l,k))
r4: sum(cons(x,nil())) -> cons(x,nil())
r5: sum(cons(x,cons(y,l))) -> sum(cons(plus(x,y),l))
r6: sum(app(l,cons(x,cons(y,k)))) -> sum(app(l,sum(cons(x,cons(y,k)))))
r7: plus(|0|(),y) -> y
r8: plus(s(x),y) -> s(plus(x,y))
r9: sum(plus(cons(|0|(),x),cons(y,l))) -> pred(sum(cons(s(x),cons(y,l))))
r10: pred(cons(s(x),nil())) -> cons(x,nil())

The set of usable rules consists of

  (no rules)

Take the reduction pair:

  generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G)
  
    base order 1:
  
      max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
      
        app#_A(x1,x2) = max{2, x1 + 1, x2 - 1}
        cons_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 11, x2 + 29}
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          app#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 7}
          cons_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 7, x2 + 6}
          app#!_A(x1,x2) = max{48, x1 - 7, x2 - 1}
          cons!_A(x1,x2) = max{47, x1 - 30, x2 + 44}
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(app#) = [1]
      pi(cons) = [2]

The following rules are removed:

  p1

Then no dependency pair remains.

-- Reduction pair.

Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of

p1: sum#(cons(x,cons(y,l))) -> sum#(cons(plus(x,y),l))

and R consists of:

r1: app(nil(),k) -> k
r2: app(l,nil()) -> l
r3: app(cons(x,l),k) -> cons(x,app(l,k))
r4: sum(cons(x,nil())) -> cons(x,nil())
r5: sum(cons(x,cons(y,l))) -> sum(cons(plus(x,y),l))
r6: sum(app(l,cons(x,cons(y,k)))) -> sum(app(l,sum(cons(x,cons(y,k)))))
r7: plus(|0|(),y) -> y
r8: plus(s(x),y) -> s(plus(x,y))
r9: sum(plus(cons(|0|(),x),cons(y,l))) -> pred(sum(cons(s(x),cons(y,l))))
r10: pred(cons(s(x),nil())) -> cons(x,nil())

The set of usable rules consists of

  r7, r8

Take the reduction pair:

  generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G)
  
    base order 1:
  
      max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
      
        sum#_A(x1) = 1
        cons_A(x1,x2) = max{7, x1 - 42, x2 - 14}
        plus_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 - 58, x2}
        |0|_A = 1
        s_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 1}
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          sum#_A(x1) = max{0, x1 - 49}
          cons_A(x1,x2) = max{33, x1 - 77, x2 + 15}
          plus_A(x1,x2) = max{37, x1 - 193, x2 + 2}
          |0|_A = 36
          s_A(x1) = max{37, x1 - 38}
          sum#!_A(x1) = max{4, x1 - 25}
          cons!_A(x1,x2) = max{3, x1 - 310}
          plus!_A(x1,x2) = max{9, x1 - 371, x2 - 86}
          |0|!_A = 1
          s!_A(x1) = max{9, x1 - 216}
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(sum#) = []
      pi(cons) = []
      pi(plus) = [2]
      pi(|0|) = []
      pi(s) = []

The following rules are removed:

  p1

Then no dependency pair remains.

-- Reduction pair.

Consider the dependency pair problem (P, R), where P consists of

p1: plus#(s(x),y) -> plus#(x,y)

and R consists of:

r1: app(nil(),k) -> k
r2: app(l,nil()) -> l
r3: app(cons(x,l),k) -> cons(x,app(l,k))
r4: sum(cons(x,nil())) -> cons(x,nil())
r5: sum(cons(x,cons(y,l))) -> sum(cons(plus(x,y),l))
r6: sum(app(l,cons(x,cons(y,k)))) -> sum(app(l,sum(cons(x,cons(y,k)))))
r7: plus(|0|(),y) -> y
r8: plus(s(x),y) -> s(plus(x,y))
r9: sum(plus(cons(|0|(),x),cons(y,l))) -> pred(sum(cons(s(x),cons(y,l))))
r10: pred(cons(s(x),nil())) -> cons(x,nil())

The set of usable rules consists of

  (no rules)

Take the reduction pair:

  generalized weighted path order (>=MG, >G)
  
    base order 1:
  
      max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
      
        plus#_A(x1,x2) = max{x1 + 5, x2 + 6}
        s_A(x1) = x1 + 4
  
    base order 2:
  
      marked-algebra reduction triple (>=A, >=A!, >A!):
      
        max/plus interpretation on natural numbers:
        
          plus#_A(x1,x2) = max{0, x1 - 13}
          s_A(x1) = max{21, x1 + 12}
          plus#!_A(x1,x2) = max{1, x1 - 22, x2 - 1}
          s!_A(x1) = max{4, x1 - 23}
  
    partial status:
  
      pi(plus#) = [1]
      pi(s) = [1]

The following rules are removed:

  p1

Then no dependency pair remains.