공유물분할
1. The remaining amount of each real estate listed in the separate sheet after deducting the expenses for auction from the proceeds of auction;
1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the statement No. 1 of the claim for partition of co-owned property, each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) may be acknowledged that the Plaintiff and the Defendant C own 15/45 shares, respectively, and Defendant C’s 3/45 shares, Defendant D, E, E, F, G, H, and I own 2/45 shares, respectively. By the date of closing argument of the instant case, the agreement on the method of partition of each of the instant lands was not reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendants.
Therefore, one of the co-owners of the instant land can file a claim for partition of co-owned property against the Defendants, who are the remaining co-owners, pursuant to Articles 268 and 269 of the Civil Act.
2. Co-owned property partition by judgment on the method of partition of co-owned property shall, in principle, be divided in kind as far as it is possible to make a rational partition according to the shares of each co-owner, and if it is impossible to divide in kind or the value thereof is likely to be substantially damaged due to such division, the proceeds thereof shall
(Article 269(2) of the Civil Act: Provided, That the requirement that "it shall not be divided in kind" in the payment shall not be physically strict interpretation, but shall include cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the property in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use situation, use value, etc. of the article jointly owned, and the use value after the division.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580 Decided April 12, 2002, etc.). The land of this case is a total of three parcels, each of which differs in the location, size, and shape, and the co-owners of each of the above lands together with the Plaintiff and the Defendants, so it is considerably difficult to seek a method of spot-sale in accordance with the equity of co-owners.
In addition, among each of the lands of this case, a grave which appears to be a representative of the Defendants is installed on the ground specified in the attached list Nos. 1 and 3, and thus the Defendants and their relatives may have different interests, and the land specified in the attached list Nos. 2 is currently a road.