Attached Form

Each land indicated in the list is jointly owned by the plaintiffs and the defendant for each share in the attached list of co-ownership shares.

B. The Plaintiff A and the Defendant, who are co-owners of the land listed in the separate sheet No. 1, did not reach an agreement on the method of partition of the land. The agreement on the method of partition of the land is not reached between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant, as co-owners of the land listed in the separate sheet

2. Determination on the part of the land indicated in attached Table No. 1

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff A has the right to claim a partition of co-owned property against the defendant as to the land listed in Paragraph 1 of the attached Table according to his co-ownership.

B. Furthermore, as to the method of partition, the partition of co-owned property by trial is in principle by the method of spot partition as long as the co-owner can make a rational partition according to the co-owner's share. It can be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances revealed in the arguments in the instant case, such as the contents of consultation with the parties, structure, size, location, utilization status, and the attitude of the parties. The following circumstances can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account each of the evidence and the whole purport of the arguments, which are as follows: ① the portion of "A" connected in sequence 5, 4, 6, 7, and 5 of the attached drawing among the land listed in the attached list corresponds to a size below the Defendant's co-owned share area (3.3 square meters = 40 x 33/400), and ② there is no difficulty in using the Plaintiff and the Defendant's land in dividing the above land as stated in the order. ③ In this case, the Defendant did not raise any objection as above and the Plaintiff's complaint was also divided as above.