A. The Plaintiff owns 5/17, Defendant B, Defendant C, Defendant D, Defendant E, Defendant F, and Defendant G in shares of 18/157, respectively, on the one hand, the 4,214 square meters in Pyeongtaek-si I (hereinafter “1 land”).

B. The Plaintiff owns 5/17, Defendant B, Defendant C, Defendant D, Defendant F, Defendant G, and Defendant H in their respective shares of 18/153, respectively.

C. The Plaintiff demanded the Defendants to divide the land Nos. 1 and 2, but there is a dispute as to whether the land is divided and the method of division between the parties.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 3 (including virtual number), the purport of whole pleading

2. According to the above facts of determination, the Plaintiff may file a claim against the Defendants for the partition of the land Nos. 1 and 2, which are jointly owned by the Defendants. In light of the following factors: (a) the shape and size of the land and the use of the land, the intention of the parties related to the partition, and the degree of increase and decrease in the shape, value, and size of the land owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendants through the division, the Plaintiff should divide the land Nos. 1 and 2 into the land in kind, such as the order Nos. 1 and 2.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.