A. The real estate listed in the Appendix 1 (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) was originally owned by the deceased F (hereinafter “the Deceased”) in proportion to the 330/39794 shares, and Nonparty G in proportion to the 39464/39794 shares.

B. On April 25, 200, the Deceased succeeded to the above 330/397 shares of Defendant B, his wife, Defendant D and E, their respective 2/7 shares.

(c)

On September 7, 2005, the Plaintiff purchased the shares of Nonparty G and completed the registration of transfer of ownership in the future of the Plaintiff, thereby becoming a person with a right to share in the instant real estate.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As a matter of principle, the division of co-owned property by judgment is a method of in-kind division as long as it is possible to make a reasonable partition according to each co-owner's share. In light of the records, the following: (a) the Plaintiff seeks to own 34,558 square meters within the scope of the Plaintiff's share area (34,847 square meters x 39464/397 shares x 39794 shares); (b) the Defendant D oppose the auction division on the ground that a grave is located in the instant real estate; (c) the attached sheet indicating 50,51,52,53, and50 square meters connected each of the above shares in succession to the above shares in inheritance B/7, Defendant D2/7, and the Defendants are family relations; and (d) the remaining portion of the pertinent real estate are jointly owned by the Defendants 34,570 square meters or more; and (d) the Defendants are also owned by each of the above shares in the instant real estate.

3. Therefore, the method of partition of the pertinent real estate is determined as above and is so decided as per Disposition.