A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) at the ratio of shares indicated in the column of co-ownership in the separate sheet No. 2 attached hereto.

B. According to the Municipal Ordinance of the city planning at Kim Jong-si where the instant real estate is located, the area of each parcel after division shall not be divided into 990 square meters in green areas and 1,650 square meters in areas other than urban areas.

C. The Plaintiff and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the partition of co-owned property by the date of closing the argument in this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of recognition as above, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant real estate, may claim a partition of the instant real estate, which is jointly owned by another co-owner, against the Defendants as co-owners.

B. 1) The requirement that a partition of co-owned property is not physically strict, but is difficult or inappropriate in light of the nature, location or size of the co-owned property, utilization situation, use value after the partition, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da40219, 4026, Sept. 10, 2009) as to the real property of this case, the following circumstances revealed by the fact of recognition and evidence, i.e., where the real property of this case is divided in kind or in kind, if the value thereof might be significantly reduced, the auction of the property can be ordered. Here, the requirement that "the division cannot be made in kind" is not physically strict. In light of the size of the real property of this case, the size of the real property of this case and the share ratio and interest of the Plaintiff and the Defendants, the minimum size of the partition should be met.