beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2021.03.25 2019가단5281203

공유물분할

Text

The defendant jointly receives KRW 21,971,778 from the plaintiff, and at the same time he knows to the plaintiffs during the period of Gyeyang-gu.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiffs and the defendant own share of 138.4 square meters in Ansan-si E (hereinafter "the land in this case"), the plaintiff A owns share of 893/1,764, the plaintiff B, and C respectively, 411/1,764, and the defendant owns share of 1/36 (=49/1,764).

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

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Since an agreement was not reached between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant on the method of dividing the instant land as a co-owner of the instant land, the Plaintiffs, some co-owners, barring any special circumstance, may file a claim against the Defendant, who is another co-owner, for the partition of the instant land, which is jointly owned pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. A lawsuit for partition of the jointly owned property is a lawsuit for partition of the jointly owned property. It is a lawsuit for partition of the jointly owned property, which means the resolution of the co-ownership relation as to the objects of the co-ownership by exchanging or selling shares among the co-owners. Thus, the court shall make a reasonable partition according to the share ratio of co-owners depending on the co-ownership relation or all the objects of the co-ownership at free discretion, rather than by the method requested by the claimant for partition.

Therefore, it is recognized that it is reasonable to acquire the article jointly owned to a specific person in consideration of the causes of the sharing relationship, the ratio of the share of the public land to the share, the economic value of the divided land, the desire of the co-owners for the divided method, and the acquisition of the price of the article jointly owned by the other co-owners does not undermine the substantial fairness

In special circumstances, the article jointly owned shall be owned by one or more co-owners, but the article jointly owned shall be owned by one or more co-owners.