공유물분할
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
Before Gunsan-si, 533 square meters shall be indicated in attached Form 1, 7, 2, 3, 8, 7.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as follows, and this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of part of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of
A. Judgment 1 of the first instance court
The part of paragraph (2) (Articles 19 to 3, 6) shall be advanced as follows:
In full view of the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the instant land was originally owned by the Defendant, Appointors, D, E, F, G, I, and the Deceased on October 15, 1995, and as the Deceased died on October 15, 1995, the Defendant and Appointors G, E, I, and F inherited the Deceased’s shares, and the Defendant and Appointors (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Defendants”).
) The Plaintiff shared shares in the shares in the Defendant, E, F, I, G 26/145, G 36/145, and D 1/29. On March 28, 2016, the Plaintiff acquired part of the Selection’s shares in the instant land (4/29 shares out of the instant land) through an auction on March 28, 2016, and the Plaintiff and the Defendants, who are co-owners of the instant land, did not reach an agreement on division. As such, the Plaintiff may file a claim against the Defendants, who are the remaining co-owners of the instant land, for the division of the instant land pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act. The Plaintiff may file a claim against the Defendants, who are co-owners of the instant land, for the division of the instant land pursuant to Articles 269(1) of the Civil Act. On Chapter 3 of the first instance trial, the appointed parties, Defendant 25, Defendant 4/25, G 25/16/25, and 25 of the designated parties.
2. According to the conclusion, the judgment of the first instance court was modified as above inasmuch as the Defendant and the appointed parties G, E, I, and F, the deceased H’s heir, were corrected as the Defendant. However, Articles 98 and 100 of the Civil Procedure Act shall apply to the bearing of litigation costs.