A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant, etc.”) and the designated parties (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant, etc.”) jointly own the land, including the Plaintiff and the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant, etc.”) and the designated parties (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant, etc.”) in Yong-gun, Yong-gun, Yong-gun, and the 4,957 square meters of forest land D (hereinafter referred to as “D land”).

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant, etc. did not reach an agreement on the method of dividing each of the instant land at the time of closing the pleadings of the instant case.

【In the absence of a dispute over a part of the grounds for recognition, each entry or video of evidence A or all pleadings, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts acknowledged as above, since an agreement on the method of partition between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, etc. sharing each of the land of this case was not concluded, the Plaintiff, a part of co-owners, may file a claim for partition of each of the land of this case against the Defendant, etc., the remaining co-owners.

B. As a matter of principle, division of co-owned property in kind can be conducted with a reasonable partition according to each co-owner’s share. The lawsuit for partition of co-owned property is formed, and the co-owner’s co-owned property is removed with the object of co-ownership through mutual exchange or trade of shares among co-owners. As such, the court should reasonably divide the co-owned property at free discretion by comprehensively taking into account the causes of co-owned relation, the proportion of co-owned shares, the economic value of co-owned shares if divided, the wishes of co-owners as to the method of partition, etc., and the following circumstances, namely, each land of this case, unlike the category on public register, is actually cultivated.