A. Each land listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) is jointly owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendants, respectively.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the method of dividing the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the claim for partition of co-owned property

A. According to the above facts acknowledged as above, the Plaintiff may file a claim against the Defendants, other co-owners, for partition of the instant land jointly owned pursuant to Articles 268(1) and 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of the survey and appraisal by appraiser E, the land in this case is the shape of a third party, and the upper part of the land listed in the attached Table No. 1 List No. 2 (the term among the images of evidence No. 3-2) is high, and the lower part was lower.

In light of the above circumstances and the location, shape, area, utilization status, etc. of the instant land, it is reasonable for the Defendants to divide the land listed in (b) section 1 through 13, 63, and 13 of the attached Table 1 into one-third share of each of the land listed in the attached Table 1 List 2, and the land listed in (a) through (3), 63, 28 through 62, and 1 of the attached Table 1, which connects each point in the attached Table 1 through 13, 63, 28 through 62, among the land listed in the attached Table 1 List 2, into one-third share of each of the Defendants.

3. If so, it is so decided as per Disposition by dividing the instant land between the Plaintiff and the Defendants as above.