A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants are co-owners of 2,308.6m2 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) in Gyeongnam-gun, Busan-gun, and their co-ownership shares are 1/5 of the Plaintiff and Defendant C, respectively, and 3/5 of the Defendants B.

B. Although the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not agree not to divide the instant real estate, they did not reach an agreement regarding the method of division.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the facts acknowledged above, since the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant real estate, and the Defendants did not reach agreement on the method of partition, the Plaintiff may file a judicial claim against the Defendants for partition pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. According to the fact-finding results as to the method of partition of co-owned property, it can be recognized that the real estate in this case is not partitioned under Article 22 of the Farmland Act as land rearrangement is completed by the agricultural production infrastructure rearrangement project pursuant to the Rearrangement of Agricultural and Fishing Villages Act around 1999. Thus, it is inappropriate to divide the real estate in kind in light of the nature, location, size, use situation, etc. of the real estate in this case

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580 delivered on April 12, 2002). Therefore, it is reasonable to divide the instant real estate by means of a method of payment by auction under Article 269(2) of the Civil Act.

3. In conclusion, it is decided as per Disposition by the court below that the real estate of this case was put to an auction and the remaining money after deducting the auction cost from the price will be divided in proportion to the share of each of the plaintiff and the defendants.