공유물분할
1. An O forest 8373 square meters in Jinju-si, and an O forest 83783 square meters in attached Form 1, 2, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, and 1.
1. Basic facts
A. Co-ownership (1) The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the share of 83783 square meters of O forest in Jinju-si (hereinafter “instant land”) in proportion to each co-ownership indicated in the “current co-ownership share” column in the attached Table 2.
(2) The Plaintiff owns, among the land in this case, the graves of shipbuilding on the part of the annexed drawing Nos. 1 (A). Defendant 2 through 12 owns, as the same house, the graves of shipbuilding on the remaining part of the land.
B. Until the closing date of the instant argument, such as the division consultation, the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the division method of the instant land, and there is no division prohibition agreement on the instant land.
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 3, and whole purport of pleadings]
2. The assertion and judgment
A. According to the above acknowledged facts, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the land of this case, may claim the partition of the land of this case against the Defendants, other co-owners.
B. The method of partition of co-owned property (1) is a form of co-ownership of the article, and one ownership of the article is divided in quantity into several persons. Thus, each co-owner has the right to abolish the existing co-ownership by unilaterally filing a claim for partition of co-owned property and realize a legal relationship for distributing co-owned property among the co-owners, except in extenuating circumstances.
Furthermore, in the method of division, if there is an agreement between the parties, the method may be selected at will, but in the event of dividing the jointly-owned property by a trial due to the failure to reach an agreement, the court may, in principle, order the auction of the goods only when it is possible to divide it in kind in kind or if it is possible to divide it in kind in kind, or the value of it is considerably reduced. Thus, barring any such circumstance, the court may order the auction of the goods according