2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

Therefore, the reasoning of this court's judgment concerning this case is as follows, except for the addition of "2. Additional Judgment" as to the defendants' additional arguments in this court, and therefore, it refers to the reasons of the judgment of the court of first instance pursuant to Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendants asserted in this court that even if the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) purchased shares of 164/16200 of the land before subdivision in the procedure for compulsory auction by Busan District Court, and the mutual title trust relationship with respect to the land before subdivision was terminated, this is merely extinguished only between the Defendants and the Plaintiff (Appointed Party). The remaining designated parties and co-owners of the land before subdivision, including the Defendants, succeed to the sectionally owned co-ownership relationship by acquiring a specific portion under the premise of the previous sectionally owned co-ownership relationship with respect to the land before subdivision. Thus, the remaining designated parties and the Defendants continue to maintain a mutual title trust relationship under the premise of co-ownership of sectionally owned ownership, and therefore, the remaining designated parties’ claims against the Defendants cannot be

B. Determination 1-related legal principles and sectionally owned co-ownership relationship is legally established only when there is an agreement by which many persons specify the location and area of a parcel of land and have divided ownership. Even if co-owners agreed to divide the jointly owned property and have occupied and used each part by specifying the divided ownership from that time, co-owners may establish a sectionally owned co-ownership relationship, but the specific portion among co-owners shall be co-owners.