공유물분할
1. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).
1. Basic facts
A. On September 28, 1999, the Defendant completed the registration of transfer with respect to the portion of 334/3954, out of the 3954 square meters of C orchard in Jeju-si (hereinafter “instant land before the instant subdivision”). On May 8, 2014, the Plaintiff, Appointors D, E, and F completed the registration of transfer with respect to the remaining 3620/3954, excluding the shares acquired by the Defendant, out of the land before the instant subdivision.
B. On August 10, 2015, the instant land before the instant partition was divided into the Cpo-source 651 square meters (hereinafter “instant land after the instant partition”) and the Gpo-source 3303 square meters. On August 10, 2015, Jeju Special Self-Governing Province completed the registration of transfer with respect to shares owned by the Plaintiff and Appointor D, E, and F, 3620/3954, among the said G land.
【Fact-finding without a dispute over the ground for recognition, entry of Gap evidence 1, result of appraiser H’s appraisal, and purport of whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion and its determination are based on the premise that the Plaintiff, the designated parties D, E, F, and the Defendant shared the land before the instant partition, and that the land before the instant partition is divided.
However, according to the above facts, on August 10, 2015, the land prior to the instant subdivision was divided into 3303 square meters in Gwon in Jeju-si after the instant subdivision. Of the G land, the registration of transfer was completed in the name of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province with respect to the share of 3620/3954, possessed by the Plaintiff, Appointers D, E, and F. Since around that time, the Plaintiff and Appointor D, E, F, and Defendant did not share the said G land. However, the Plaintiff continued to seek partition of the said land after the instant subdivision jointly owned by the Defendant without changing the purport of the claim. As such, the Plaintiff’s claim for partition of the common property prior to the instant subdivision is without merit as it seeks partition of the goods that are not subject to division.
The Plaintiff’s claim of this case against the Defendant.