1. The amount of money remaining after the sale price is deducted from the auction cost by selling G forest land of 55,175 square meters in Jinju-si.

According to the facts without dispute over ownership of the forest of this case and the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and No. 175 square meters of G forest in Jinju-si (hereinafter “the forest of this case”) may be recognized that the plaintiff and the defendant shared co-ownership share in each co-ownership share as stated in the co-ownership share in the attached Form No. 1.

In light of the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence as seen earlier prior to the method of dividing the jointly-owned properties, co-owners of the instant forest will be six persons together with the original and the Defendant. On the other hand, the length of the “roadway” portion indicated in the certified copy of the annexed forestry map where the said forest land adjoins the road is not more than about 50 to 100 meters; the land owned by another person among the said forest land is divided into almost half of the said forest land; the said forest land is located as if the land owned by another person is divided into almost half of the said forest land; the said forest land is “roadway” indicated in the above forestry map; and the said forest land map is

In light of the above facts, if the forest of this case is divided in kind into the forest of this case, it is difficult to see all co-owners' land in contact with the road, and considering the shape, etc. of the forest of this case to be well seen, the usefulness of the forest of this case seems to be significantly diminished. On the other hand, if part of the forest of this case is divided into a blind land, there may be considerable disadvantages and inconvenience to co-owners who will be divided into a blind land. In addition, it is difficult to cut down the forest of this case, which seems to be contrary to all co-owners, because other land in the forest of this case is located as wide as the forest of this case is cut off.

In the process of the instant pleading, no proposal or agreement was made between the original and the Defendant on the plan to adjust the area of forests and fields or to supplement them such as price compensation, which could resolve the said difficulties, and four of the six co-owners are co-owners to divide the auction.

Therefore, the forest land of this case is put to an auction and the auction cost is deducted from the price.