A. The deceased E (the deceased on July 1, 2001, hereinafter “the deceased”) divorced on July 25, 1978 from F and the Defendant C around November 25 of the same year.

The plaintiffs are children born between the deceased and F, and the defendant D is children born between the deceased and the defendant C.

B. On June 19, 2001, the Plaintiffs and the Defendants filed for the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each of 1/4 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 4 with respect to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8 (hereinafter “real estate No. 1 through No. 8” in the order of 22 of the same month, and the combination thereof “each of the real estate of this case”).

C. On the other hand, on October 25, 2001, the debtor C, the maximum debt amount of 4550 million won, the establishment registration of a mortgage, which is the creditor national bank, was made, with respect to each real estate of this case on the same day, the establishment registration of a mortgage, which is the creditor national bank, was made, "the ownership of a solid building and trees: the ownership of a solid building and trees: the scope: the entire land; the entire duration of the land; the period from October 25, 2001 to 30 years; and the registration of creation of superficies, which is the national bank, was made.

The Defendants, after acquiring shares in each of the instant real estate, operate a restaurant with the trade name “G” (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) and occupied the restaurant before it.

E. Meanwhile, there was no agreement between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants on the prohibition of partition of co-owned property as to each of the instant real estate, and there was no agreement on the method of partition.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 (including each number, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts as to the claim related to partition of co-owned property, the plaintiffs are co-owners of each real estate of this case, and they are co-owners of other co-owners pursuant to the main sentence of Article 268(1) of the Civil Act.