beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2018.02.09 2016가단4325

공유물분할

Text

1. 전남 신안군 F 임야 40,364㎡에 관하여, 별지1 도면 표시 ㅈ1, ㅇ, ㅈ, ㅊ, ㅋ, ㅌ, ㅈ1의 각 점을...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and Defendant B owned 2,035/12,210 of each of the instant forest land, and 1,000/210 of each of the instant forest land, and Defendant C owned 6,140 of each of the instant forest land, respectively.

B. Meanwhile, as of the date of the closing of argument in the instant case, there was no special agreement prohibiting partition of co-owned property between the Plaintiff and the Defendants.

[Reasons for Recognition] Defendant B: Each entry in the evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as a whole, of confessions (Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Determination

A. According to the facts acknowledged above, the Plaintiff, as co-owners of the instant forest, may claim the partition of the instant forest land against the Defendants, who are other co-owners pursuant to the main sentence of Article 268(1) of the Civil Act.

In addition, if the consultation on the method of partition does not lead to an agreement, a partition of co-owned property may be brought to the court pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act. The facts that the plaintiff and the defendants did not reach an agreement on the partition of co

Therefore, upon the Plaintiff’s request, the forest of this case, which is jointly owned, is divided.

B. In principle, the partition of co-owned property according to the judgment on the method of partition of co-owned property shall be made in kind with the one in which a rational partition can be made according to the share of each co-owner, but it does not necessarily have to create the sole ownership of the co-owner as to the divided property. Thus, the co-owner who wants the partition of co-owned property may have the co-owner own

As a whole, the appraiser of the evidence revealed above, the location, shape, area, utilization status of the instant forest, road and surrounding topography, Defendant D, and Defendant E’s forest of this case, by comprehensively taking into account the results of the survey and appraisal conducted by the newly established branch of the Korea Land Information Corporation and the purport of the entire pleadings.