The amount remaining after deducting the auction cost from the proceeds of the sale of one real estate entered in the list for auction.

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) in the same proportion as the written order.

B. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit and sought the division of the instant real estate, but no agreement was reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the method of dividing the instant real estate until the date of closing the argument.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff, one of the co-owners of the instant real estate, can file a claim for partition of co-owned property against the Defendants, who are the remaining co-owners, pursuant to Articles 268 and 269 of the Civil Act.

In the case of dividing the jointly-owned property through a trial, if it is impossible to divide it in kind or if it is possible to divide it in kind in kind, and if the value is likely to be significantly reduced, an auction of the property may be ordered. Therefore, it is difficult to divide each of the instant real property into the site and the building on the ground, which consists of the building site and the building on the ground, and it is difficult for Defendant F to divide it in kind to have a part of the Plaintiff and the Defendants owned, and Defendant F cannot confirm its intention by public notice, and the remaining Defendants do not want to purchase the Plaintiff’s share.

Therefore, each of the instant real estate constitutes a case where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the instant real estate in kind, which can satisfy the interests of the parties.

Therefore, since each of the instant real estate is considered to be the most appropriate method to divide the price among co-owners according to the co-ownership ratio by attaching it to the auction, the remaining amount after deducting the expense from the auction price shall be divided by the method of each co-ownership share distribution as indicated in the order of co-ownership.

3. According to the conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted for reasons.