A. On April 18, 2013, the Plaintiff received a successful bid for a compulsory auction procedure on April 18, 2013 with respect to 1/4 shares of the real estate indicated in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

5.27. A person who has completed the registration of ownership transfer.

B. Defendant B owned 1/4 of the instant real estate, and Defendant C owned 1/2 of the instant real estate.

C. The Plaintiff requested the Defendants to consult on the division of the instant real estate, but the Defendants did not comply with the request.

[Grounds for recognition] The items of evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and the whole purport of the pleading

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff may request the court to divide the real estate of this case into the court under Articles 268 and 269 of the Civil Code.

Since the instant real estate is one partitioned building and it is impossible to divide it in kind, it is reasonable to issue an order for the auction of the instant real estate by the method of division to distribute the price according to the ratio of each co-owner’s shares.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable.