공유물분할
1. The plaintiff and the plaintiff who put 2,281m2 of the forest E in Gyeonggi-gu to an auction and deducts the auction cost from the proceeds.
Comprehensively taking account of the whole purport of the pleadings as to Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the plaintiff purchased 1/4 of Gyeonggi-gun E Forest 2,281m2 (hereinafter referred to as the "land of this case") in the public sale procedure and shared the registration of ownership transfer on April 23, 2014. The remaining shares were owned by the defendants, and no special agreement was made between co-owners of the above land to divide them. The plaintiff attempted to contact the defendants in order to consult about the method of partition of co-owned property of the above land, but attempted in the conciliation procedure of this case, but failed to draw an adequate in-kind divided method. The plaintiff can recognize the fact that only some of the areas of the land of this case are forest adjoining to the road and consisting of forest land with high gradient from the surface of the road.
As to the division of the article jointly owned, Article 269 of the Civil Act provides, “(1) If an agreement is not reached with respect to the method of division, co-owners may request the court to divide it. ② If it is impossible to divide it in kind or the value of it might be reduced remarkably due to the division, the court may order the auction of the article.”
In principle, division of co-owned property by judgment shall be made in kind so that each co-owner can make a reasonable division according to his/her share. However, in the payment division, the requirement that "it cannot be divided in kind" is not physically strict interpretation. It includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to make a division in kind in light of the nature, location, area, utilization status, and use value after the division, etc. of co-owned property, not physically strict interpretation.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580, Apr. 12, 2002). The instant land is forest and field, and it is considerably difficult or inappropriate for co-owners to divide the instant land in kind with the value equal to that of the co-owners, because only a part of the land is adjacent to the road.