The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared a large of 256 square meters U.S. (hereinafter “instant real estate”) according to their respective shares as indicated in the attached Table. The fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the method of partition of the instant real estate by the closing date of the pleadings of this case does not conflict between the parties, or that the agreement on the method of partition was not reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendants, may be acknowledged by taking into account the overall purport of the pleadings as a whole.

Judgment

According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff is a co-owner of the instant real estate, and there is no agreement on the method of division with the Defendants, who are other co-owners. Thus, the Plaintiff may claim against the Defendants the division of the instant real estate as the instant lawsuit

Furthermore, with respect to the method of dividing the real estate in this case, the method of dividing the common property in kind is in principle, and the method of dividing the common property in kind is not possible in kind or in kind if the value of the property in kind is likely to be significantly reduced, an auction may be ordered, and the case of dividing it in kind shall not be physically strictly interpreted, but it shall include the case where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide it in kind in light of the nature, location or area of the common property, the situation of its use, the use value after the division, etc.

I would like to say.

In full view of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the plaintiff wanted to make a partition of co-owned property, while most defendants except defendant Thai-si and Q do not present any opinion as to the method of partition, and defendant Thai-si want to divide the real estate in kind only with the area corresponding to its share, but now, since the real estate of this case is packed on the road, etc. and the area of its part exceeds the share of defendant Thai-si.