(a) connect each point of the Annex 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1, in sequence;

A. The real estate listed in the separate sheet (1) (hereinafter “instant land”) is jointly owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendants at their respective shares specified in the separate sheet (2).

(However, the defendant 15. AD only correction is made as O). (b)

Before the filing of the instant lawsuit, co-owners did not reach an agreement on the method of dividing the instant land.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute between the parties, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. As seen in the above facts acknowledged, the Plaintiff and the Defendants sharing the instant land did not reach an agreement on partition of co-owned property, and there is no agreement on partition prohibition as stipulated in the proviso of Article 268(1) of the Civil Act. Thus, the Plaintiff may file a claim against the Defendants for partition of the instant land pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. In full view of the health stand, the shape of the instant land recognized by the aforementioned evidence, the purpose and purpose of use of the instant land, the present state of the instant land, the parties’ intent expressed in the oral proceedings of the instant case, etc., it is reasonable to divide the instant land in kind as indicated in the text.

3. In conclusion, we decide to divide the land of this case as above and decide as per Disposition.