공유물분할
1. Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, 1,210.9 square meters shall be divided and owned by the plaintiff alone;
2. The plaintiff is the defendant 180,000.
1. Basic facts
A. On March 13, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased shares from six co-owners, such as D, etc. of the former co-owners of the instant land, and thereafter purchased shares from all co-owners, other than the Defendant, from around that time until the closing date of the instant argument.
B. The Defendant did not comply with the Plaintiff’s claim for purchase of shares. At present, the Plaintiff owned 1130.5 square meters among the instant land, the Defendant owned 80.4 square meters, and the Plaintiff shared 25095/2680 shares (93.36%) and the Defendant shared 1785/2680 shares (64%) respectively.
C. Since the instant land is located in the E Land Readjustment Project district and its commercial area is not allowed to be divided in kind in which at least 400 square meters are not more than 40 square meters, considering the attitude that the Defendant seems to have with regard to the currently owned area and sales of shares, the Plaintiff’s acquisition of shares in the instant land, etc., it seems that it is not easy for the Plaintiff and the Defendant to divide in kind in
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 4, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts, pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant land, may file a claim for the partition of the instant land against the Defendant, who is another co-owner.
B. As to the method of division, the division of the common property is a principle for the division in kind, but it is not possible to divide the property in kind between the source and the defendant in fact as seen in the above basic facts.
If so, it is inevitable to consider the method of dividing the price through auction or paying the price equivalent to the exchange value of the share to the other party when the whole land of this case is owned by one party.
In addition, the lawsuit of division of the article jointly owned is the lawsuit of so-called formation, which is the object of the co-ownership through the exchange or sale of shares between co-owners.