1. The amount of money remaining after deducting the auction cost from the proceeds of the sale by selling 5,950 square meters for C forest land in Jeon Chang-gun, Jeon Chang-gun; and

1. The Plaintiff, in fact, owns 4/5 shares among the 5,950 square meters of forest C forest land in Jeon Chang-gun, Jeon Chang-gun (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and the Defendant owns 1/5 shares of the said real estate.

The Central Tax Office attached the above defendant's share due to the disposition on default.

There is no agreement prohibiting the division of the instant real estate between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and there is no agreement on the division method of the instant real estate as of the date of closing the argument in this case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1-3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above acknowledged facts, the Plaintiff, the co-owner of the instant real estate, and the Defendant, did not reach an agreement on the method of partition of the instant real estate. Therefore, the Plaintiff may claim a partition of co-owned property in the court pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. The method of partition of co-owned property is, in principle, divided in kind, but the co-owned property may be divided according to auction only when it is not possible to divide it in kind or the value thereof may be reduced remarkably by division.

(Article 269(2) of the Civil Act. According to the above facts, the disposition for arrears by the defendant among the real estate in this case was made, and such seizure continues to exist on the whole co-owned property according to the previous share ratio even after the co-owned property was divided in kind. Thus, it is impossible to divide the real estate in kind.

In addition, it is very complicated to compensate for the depreciation of the value according to the existing seizure, so it is difficult to divide the value in kind according to the compensation for value.

Therefore, since the instant real estate constitutes a case in which the co-owned property cannot be divided in kind, it is subject to the payment due to the auction.

Therefore, the remaining money, which was referred to an auction and deducted the auction cost from the sale price, shall be the share ratio of the plaintiff and the defendant (Plaintiff 4/5, Defendant 1/5).