According to the above, the plaintiff can claim against the defendant for the division of common property of the real estate of this case based on the right to share common property of this case, unless there are special circumstances.

I would like to say.

2. In the case of dividing the article jointly owned through a trial on the method of partition, if it is impossible to divide the article in kind or if the value of the article is likely to be significantly reduced, the auction of the article may be ordered. Here, the requirement does not physically strictly interpret it, but includes the case where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the article in kind in light of the nature, location, size, use situation, and use value of the article jointly owned (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580 delivered on April 12, 2002). The defendant did not answer any time even after being served with the complaint of this case seeking the auction of the real property in this case. According to the overall purport of the statement or image and change theory on evidence Nos. 5 and 6, the real property in this case is difficult to divide the real property in kind by taking into account the location, use status, size of the land in this case as the illegal type, and the use value of the real property in kind after the division or the sale in kind is considerably difficult.

3. Thus, the real estate of this case is divided by auction.