공유물분할
1. The sales price shall be the remainder of 14532m2.3m3m2 in Seosan-si after deducting the expenses for the auction from the sales price.
In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiff and the defendants shared the land size of 14532.3 square meters (hereinafter "the land of this case") in the ratio of shares as stated in paragraph (1) of this Article in Seosan-si, and the plaintiff and the defendants did not form a co-owned property partition consultation as to the land of this case between the plaintiff and the defendants.
According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the land of this case, may claim a partition of co-owned property against the Defendants pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act
Furthermore, we examine the partition method.
In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 1, as a whole, the land of this case is less than 14,532.3 square meters and the area corresponding to the plaintiff's share is less than 658.3 square meters per defendant, and the area corresponding to the defendants' share is less than 91 square meters per defendant. The land of this case can be recognized that it is impossible to divide the land into 2,000 square meters or less as the land where the agricultural infrastructure improvement project as prescribed by Article 22(2) of the Farmland Act is implemented, and according to the above facts, it is impossible to divide the land of this case into money in kind. Thus, it is reasonable
Therefore, it is decided as per Disposition by dividing the land of this case according to the method of payment in installments.