A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants are co-owners of each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) and their share ratio are as listed in the separate sheet of co-ownership.

B. The shape of the instant real estate is as shown in the annexed drawing.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff, one of the co-owners of each of the instant real property, establishing the right to demand partition, may file a claim against the Defendants, who are other co-owners, for the partition of each of the instant real property, which is jointly owned. The agreement on the method of partition between the Plaintiff and the Defendants was not concluded until the closure of the pleadings in

B. As to the case, the division of the article jointly owned by the trial is a matter of principle that the division of the article jointly owned by each co-owner is made in kind, or if it is impossible to divide the article in kind or it is possible to divide the article in kind in kind, and if the value of the article is likely to be significantly reduced, the auction of the article may be ordered (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Da30583, Oct. 14, 2004, etc.). Since each of the real property in this case is owned by the majority as well as by the co-owners, it is likely that the value of each of the real property in this case is significantly reduced or that a fair division is not made between the co-owners if it is divided in kind.

The decision is judged.

3) Therefore, it is reasonable to divide the remaining amount after deducting the auction cost from the proceeds that each of the instant real estate was sold at auction to the Plaintiff and the Defendants according to the ratio of each co-owned share.

3. In conclusion, each of the instant real estate is divided as above, and it is so decided as per Disposition.