2. The defendant shall pay 90,000,000 won to the plaintiff.

A. As to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), the Plaintiff and the Defendant shared at the ratio of 1/2, respectively.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant were legal spouses, but they were divorced by a judgment of the court around February 2016.

(C) The Suwon District Court Decision 2014Da 7216 decided February 4, 2016.

There is no separate agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the prohibition of subdivision regarding the instant real estate, and no agreement on the method of subdivision of the said real estate has been reached until the date of closing of the instant argument

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts acknowledged as above, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant real estate, may file a claim against the Defendant, who is another co-owner, for partition of the instant real estate jointly owned pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. In principle, partition of co-owned property in kind can be divided in kind according to each co-owner's share. However, even if it is impossible in kind or it is possible in form, if the value might be significantly reduced, it can be divided in kind. Here, it does not physically strictly interpret it, but it should include cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide it in kind in light of the nature, location, size, use situation of the co-owned property, use value after the division, etc. In addition, even if the co-owner's co-owner's share is divided in kind, it is difficult or inappropriate to divide it in kind, and it includes cases where it might remarkably decrease the value of the part to be owned independently by the division in kind, if it might remarkably decrease the value of the share before the division.