A. 1) The instant real estate is jointly owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendants at each ratio of 1/3. 2) The agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the method of dividing the instant real estate was not reached until the closing date of the instant argument.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1, 2, and 7 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the facts acknowledged as above, one of the co-owners of the instant real estate may claim the partition of co-owned property against the Defendants, who are other co-owners, pursuant to the main sentence of Article 268(1) and Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

C. In a case where co-owned property is divided through a trial on the method of partition of co-owned property, the size of the land acquired by each co-owner shall be equal to the ratio of the co-owned share, barring special circumstances. In full view of all the circumstances, such as the location, use situation, size and economic value of the real estate of this case known by the whole purport of each evidence and pleadings as above, it is deemed reasonable to divide the real estate of this case into the Plaintiff’s ownership of 281 square meters in sequence of the items indicated in the separate sheet No. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 562 square meters into one/2 shares of each of the Defendants.

2. According to the conclusion, the real estate of this case is to be divided in kind as above, and it is so decided as per Disposition.