2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The registration of preservation of ownership was completed on June 16, 1981 with respect to F, G, and H owned each 1/3 share of 1160 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. Around March 18, 200, Defendant C received F’s share in the instant real estate due to the inheritance due to the agreement division as of November 24, 1999. The Plaintiff received H’s share in the instant real estate due to the inheritance as of June 15, 2007, and around October 26, 1993. Defendant D transferred G’s share in the said real estate due to the inheritance as of August 5, 2015. < Amended by Act No. 13588, Sep. 21, 2014>

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings]

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff asserts that the real estate of this case should be divided, as stated in the claim(attached Form 1), shall be co-owned by the defendants and 1/3.

B. The defendants asserted that the plaintiff and the fence installed on the real estate of this case divided their own housing site as shown in the annexed Form 2, and thus, the plaintiff's claim for partition of co-owned property is unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. Relevant legal principles and key issues 1) If the Plaintiff and the Defendants who succeeded to the shares of the instant real estate do not purely share the instant real estate according to their shares in the register, but in mutual title trust relations, they cannot make a claim for partition of co-owned property merely because they have to seek implementation of the share transfer registration procedure based on the termination of title trust (see Supreme Court Decision 95Da8430, Feb. 23, 1996). In this case, the claim for partition of co-owned property should be dismissed (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Da53043, Sept. 28, 2006). Ultimately, the issue of this case should be whether the Plaintiff and the Defendants share the instant real estate according to their shares in the register or are mutually under title trust with the boundary of the fence.

(b) fact that there is no dispute over judgment, Nos. 1 and 1.