In fact, the registration of change of ownership of the plaintiff and the defendant 1/2 shares was completed due to the purchase on March 12, 1993 with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list No. 1 of the attached list, and the registration of change of ownership was made on August 17, 2005 with the plaintiff's shares 1/7 and 6/7 with the defendant's shares 6/7.

On August 17, 2005, the share of 1/7 shares in the defendant's name was registered as the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer in the name of the plaintiff on the ground of trade reservation.

The defendant recognized that the plaintiff owns 2/7 shares in the above land (=1/7 provisional registration 1/7).

The registration of preservation of ownership of Plaintiff 2/7 shares and Defendant 5/7 shares was completed with respect to the real estate listed in paragraph 2 of the attached Table constructed on the land.

【In light of the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the entire pleadings, and the method of dividing the part of the building separated from the building in this case to have independence in structural use, etc., it is difficult to divide the land in kind. It is also inappropriate to divide the land in this case, which is the site of the building, by a different method from the building, and all the original defendants appear not to oppose the method of auction or division (the defendant raised an objection against the ruling of recommending settlement in this case, which ordered the auction or division, while he stated in the preparatory document on May 27, 2015). Thus, it is reasonable to allow the land and building in this case to divide the price by ordering the auction or division).

In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.