beta
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2015.02.10 2014가단105574

공유물분할

Text

1. It connects 443 square meters Glysi-si Gly-si to each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 1 in sequence.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership on February 18, 2008 with respect to shares of 114/134 out of G-si G-si 443 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. The remaining 20/134 shares of the instant land were owned by the deceased H (hereinafter “the deceased”). On December 4, 200, the deceased died, and Defendant C, D, E, and F, who is the wife, jointly inherited the instant property.

C. Even until the closing date of the instant argument, there was no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the method of dividing the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] Defendant C, D, and F: Defendant B, and E deemed a confession; the absence of dispute; evidence A 1-1; the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts acknowledged, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the land of this case, may file a claim for partition of the real estate of this case against the Defendants, another co-owner, pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. Considering the following facts and circumstances, where there is no dispute between the parties to the method of partition, or where evidence Nos. 2-3, 3, 4, and 6-1 can be recognized by comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings, it is reasonable to divide the land of this case and the land of this case, and the land of this case, part No. 1, part No. 376, indicated in the annexed drawing No. 1, into the Plaintiff’s ownership, and the part No. 67,00 square meters in the “bbb” portion

(1) The entire land of this case is designated as an urban area, natural green area or natural village district.

② Since the part of the land in this case is used as the current state of the road in the direction towards the west and west part, access to the land in this case is not to be used, but to the northwest and west, there is no access road.

③ Since the 40m2 adjacent to the same side of the instant land owned by the Defendants, the Defendants’ possession of the same part seems to be favorable for land utilization.

④ The north side of the instant land.