- Plaintiff: 9716.25/2239 - Defendant B: 366/22399 equity - Defendant C: 4594.25/22399 equity - Defendant D: 4620.25/22399 equity - Defendant E: 2553.25/22399 equity - Defendant F: 549/22399 equity / A: The fact that there is no dispute on the ground of recognition; the entries in the evidence A 1 and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the instant real estate, and there was no agreement on the method of partition between the Plaintiff and the Defendants by the date of the closing of pleadings. Thus, the Plaintiff and the Defendants may file a claim for partition of the instant real estate.

B. Division of one method of partition of co-owned property can be selected at will if the co-owners reach an agreement, but if the co-owned property is divided by a trial due to the failure to reach an agreement, in principle, the court shall divide it in kind. If it is impossible to divide it in kind or if it is possible to divide it in kind, the auction of the property can be ordered only when the value might be reduced remarkably. Thus, barring the above circumstances, the court shall decide to divide the co-owned property into several goods in kind according to the ratio of shares of co-owners and to recognize the sole ownership of each co-owner for the divided property.

In addition, the method of division is not a way requested by the parties, but a reasonable division is made according to the ratio of shares of co-owners according to the circumstances of co-ownership or the objects of the division, according to the discretion of the court.