A. As to the land of 77 square meters in Sung-gun, Sung-gun, Sung-gun (hereinafter “instant land”), the Plaintiff owned 45/57 and the Defendant owned co-ownership shares of 12/57.

B. Until the date of closing the argument in this case, consultation on the method of dividing the land in this case did not have been formed.

C. On the ground of the instant land, there are 31.68 square meters in a house with a soil brick structure string roof and 31.68 square meters in a block structure and a block string roof 2.25 square meters in a single story (hereinafter “instant building”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above acknowledged facts, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant land, may file a claim for partition of the instant land against the Defendant, who is another co-owner pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. A method of partition of co-owned property can be divided in kind in a case of dividing the co-owned property through a trial. If the value of the co-owned property is unable to be divided in kind or is likely to be significantly reduced, an auction of the co-owned property may be ordered. Here, “undivided in kind” includes cases where it is physically impossible to divide the co-owned property, and where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the property in kind in light of the nature, location or size of the co-owned property, the situation of its use, and the use value after the division. Further, even if the co-owner was to divide the property in kind, it includes cases where the value of the property to be owned in kind might be significantly reduced compared to the share value of the property before the division (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 92Da30603, Jan. 19, 1993; 2013Da2675, Dec. 10, 2015).