공유물분할
1. The part against Defendant B among the instant lawsuit is dismissed.
2. It shall be put up for an auction a lot of not less than 853m2 in Hongcheon-gun G.
1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part concerning the claim for partition against Defendant B is legitimate, and the co-owner becomes the Plaintiff and all other co-owners shall be the co-defendant. As such, where the whole share of some co-owners is transferred to a third party during the lawsuit as to partition of co-owned property, and the transferee of the co-owned share remains without withdrawal, even though he/she participated in or participated in the lawsuit concerning partition of co-owned property, the part concerning the previous party who did not withdraw is unlawful.
As the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the partition of 853 square meters (hereinafter “instant site”), which is jointly owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendants, with respect to Hongcheon-gun Glue-gun G (hereinafter “instant lawsuit”). On October 15, 2014, the lawsuit pending, Defendant B’s share was transferred to Defendant B’s Intervenor B (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) and the Intervenor F accepted the lawsuit against Defendant B upon the court’s decision, but the Intervenor F accepted the lawsuit against the Defendant B, the fact that the Plaintiff did not withdraw from the instant lawsuit is apparent in the record or that the Plaintiff did not withdraw from the lawsuit may be acknowledged by the overall purport of the entry and pleading in the evidence No. 1.
Therefore, the part against Defendant B among the instant lawsuit is unlawful.
2. Determination as to the remainder of the Defendants except Defendant B and the Intervenor
A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the instant site at the time of September 26, 2014, which was the date of the instant lawsuit, at the respective rates of 3/12, 3/12, 3/12, 3/12, D, and 2/12, respectively. 2) After that, on October 15, 2014, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of Defendant B’s 3/12 on the instant site on October 15, 2014, and the Plaintiff and the Intervenor F shared the instant site at the respective ratios of 2/12, respectively.
3. On the other hand, among the instant land.