공유물분할
1. The Plaintiff shall sell 886m2 prior to C at auction at a macro-si and the remainder after deducting the auction cost from the price.
1. The facts of recognition are shared by the Plaintiff and the Defendant in proportion to one-half shares of each of the 886 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”). The facts that the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not reach an agreement on the division of the instant real estate between the Plaintiff and the Defendant do not conflict between the parties, or that the agreement on the division of the instant real estate was not reached, may be recognized by each entry in Gap’s Evidence Nos.
2. According to the above facts of recognition, one of the co-owners of the real estate of this case may claim a partition of the real estate of this case against the defendant based on his co-ownership.
In addition, the following circumstances, which can be recognized by the evidence mentioned above, are the cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to fairly divide the real estate between the co-owners while maintaining the utility value of the real estate in kind by means of the in-kind or the partial value compensation, in view of the fact that the plaintiff wants to divide the real estate through the auction or the defendant wants to purchase the plaintiff's shares by means of the purchase of the plaintiff's shares, that the defendant clearly expresses that he does not intend to purchase the plaintiff's shares, and that there is no particular method of partition, and that in the case of the in-kind division, there is a concern that the function and value of the land may be reduced after the division, in light of the size, location, and current use of the real estate in this case, it is reasonable to sell the real estate in this case through the auction and distribute the remaining amount after deducting the auction cost from the auction
3. In conclusion, this case's real estate is sold at auction to the plaintiff and the defendant with the remaining amount after deducting the auction cost from the price. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below.