A. Of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), the Plaintiff holds 226/8420 shares, 6612/8420 shares in Defendant B, 226/8420 shares in Defendant C, and 678/8420 shares in Defendant D and E, respectively.

B. At present, there is no agreement on whether to divide the instant real estate and the method thereof.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff may request the court to divide the land of this case against the Defendants pursuant to Articles 268 and 269 of the Civil Act.

B. In principle, the installment method is divided in kind; however, all the other Defendants and the Plaintiff except Defendant E do not raise any objection to the installment of the real estate at auction and by paying the price. Meanwhile, Defendant E also does not give any reply despite being served with the Plaintiff’s complaint that the Plaintiff wishes to pay the price in advance; Defendant B’s share and the remaining Defendants’ share and the remaining Defendants’ relationship (Defendant B holds shares of 612/8420) with Defendant B and the remaining Defendants. While Defendant B acquired the above shares through the sale, Defendant B acquired the above shares, the remaining Defendants are deemed inappropriate to divide the Plaintiff’s share and the Plaintiff’s proposed installment in kind with the remaining Defendants as they are jointly owned, in light of the fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not present the plan to pay in kind. In addition, the real estate of this case is difficult or inappropriate to sell the real estate in kind and the other Defendants’ share and the other Defendants’ relationship with Defendant B and the other Defendants.

3. Conclusion, the real estate of this case is to be paid in installments as above, and it is so decided as per Disposition.