This question has already been answered here: Prove that $gNg^{-1} \subseteq N$ iff $gNg^{-1} = N$
I was wondering whether the following proof is also acceptable and if not what is wrong with it. Suppose that $gNg^-1 \subset N$ but there exist $n_1$ s.t $n_1 \in N$ but $n_1 \notin gNg^-1$. Since $gNg^-1 = \{gng^-1 | n \in N\}$ we know that $\exists \ a \in gNg^-1$ s.t $ a = gn_1g^-1$, by group cancellation laws we have $n_1 = gag^-1$, since $a \in N$ we have that $n_1 \in gNg^-1$ since $n_1$ is arbitrary we have that $gNg^-1 = N$