A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants jointly own a forest E, 7822m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) in Jeonyang-gun, Jeonyang-gun, and each co-owned share is Plaintiff 6/13, Defendant B2/13, and Defendant D5/13.

B. No agreement was reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the method of dividing the land of this case until the date of closing the argument of this case.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts acknowledged above, since the agreement on the method of partition between the plaintiff and the defendants, who are co-owners of the land of this case, did not constitute the co-owners of the land of this case, the plaintiff is entitled to file a partition claim against the defendants as co-owners

B. Co-owned property partition method 1) Division of co-owned property may be selected at will if the co-owners reach an agreement, but if the co-owned property is divided through a trial due to the failure to reach an agreement, the court shall in principle divide it in kind, and if it is impossible to divide it in kind or it is possible to divide it in kind, the auction of the property can be ordered only when the value thereof is likely to decrease substantially. Thus, barring such circumstances, the court shall decide to recognize the sole ownership of each co-owner for the divided property by dividing the jointly-owned property into several goods in kind in proportion to the shares of each co-owner, and the method of division shall not be determined by the parties at their own discretion, but shall be reasonably divided according to the share ratio of the co-owner at the court’s discretion, depending on the co-owned relation or all the circumstances of the goods (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da18219, Sept. 9, 197). 2)

The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the purport of the entire pleadings, on each description and image of evidence Nos. 1 to 9.