2. Claim against Defendant D, E, F, G, H, and I: Decision on deemed confession (Article 208(3)2, and Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act);

3. The facts stated in the separate sheet of claim and the changed cause of claim against Defendant C do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to the entries in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2.

In principle, partition of co-owned property based on a judgment shall be divided in kind as long as it is possible to make a reasonable partition according to the share of each co-owner, and if it is impossible to divide in kind in kind or the value thereof is likely to be substantially damaged due to such division, the price shall be divided through

(2) Article 269(2) of the Civil Act provides that if the purport of the entire pleadings is added to the statement on Gap evidence 1, the plaintiffs set up a right to collateral with respect to the portion owned by the plaintiffs among the real estate subject to division, with respect to the right to share owned by the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs are recognized as having set up a right to collateral with respect to the maximum debt amount of 643,50,000 won. If a right to collateral is established with respect to a part of the co-ownership share, it would be complicated to compensate for the depreciation arising from the right to collateral, and it would also be difficult to divide by the value compensation if the right to collateral is divided in kind, and the plaintiffs want to pay the proceeds by auction and the defendants do not provide any other alternative on the method of division, it is reasonable to divide the remaining amount after deducting the auction cost from the proceeds