공유물분할등기
1. The amount of real estate listed in the separate sheet remaining after the cost of auction is deducted from the proceeds of auction;
1. A building listed in the attached list of the facts of recognition (hereinafter “instant building”) is owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s succeeding Intervenor (the Plaintiff’s 154.0426/1959.98 shares, and the Defendant’s succeeding Intervenor’s 415.9374/1959.98 shares).
There was no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s succeeding intervenor on the division method of the building of this case.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-4 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant building, and the Intervenor succeeding to the Defendant did not reach an agreement on the method of partition. As such, the Plaintiff has the right to co-owned share against the Defendant succeeding Intervenor, based on the right to co-owned share.
In a case of dividing an article jointly owned by a trial, if it is impossible to divide it in kind or it is possible to divide it in kind, and if the value thereof is apprehended to be reduced remarkably, the auction of the article may be ordered.
Here, the requirement includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide property in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use situation, and use value after the division, etc. of the common property, and the requirement that “the value of the portion to be owned by the owner in kind may be significantly reduced if the division is made in kind” includes cases where the value of the portion to be owned by the owner in kind might be significantly reduced compared to the share value before the division even if the co-owner is a person.
Considering the nature of the building of this case (one of the commercial buildings), location (4th floor), area (90.38 square meters (27.3 square meters) and the co-ownership of the Defendant’s succeeding intervenor, the area corresponding to the co-ownership of the Defendant’s succeeding intervenor is about 19.18 square meters (5.8 square meters)), usage status, use value after the division, the co-ownership of the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s succeeding intervenor, and the process of consultation on the method of division, it is reasonable to divide the building of this case by auction.