1. The plaintiff's appeal and the second preliminary claim added in the trial are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the facts are as follows: (a) other than the third [Attachment 2] of the judgment of the court of first instance using “the aggregate of the plaintiff shares” as “the aggregate of the defendant shares”, the pertinent part of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance (from 7th to 3th below) is the same as the corresponding part of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance (from 14th below of the second to 14th below of the judgment of the court of first instance). Thus,

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Main Hot Spring Co., Ltd., the primary claim-based hot spring company, as the owner of the land E-gu Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu (hereinafter “Seoul-gu”) prior to subdivision, sold the land by classifying the location and size of the land, but the registration of ownership transfer was completed with the co-ownership share of the land E prior to subdivision without dividing it for convenience.

In the 1960s, the F purchased the part corresponding to the land of this case from the E land before subdivision, and received the share transfer registration on the land before subdivision, and the F constructed the building of this case and completed the registration of ownership preservation in 1970.

D as F's children, F purchased the entirety of F's shares (105.96/5206) of the instant land in the auction procedure of real estate rent in 2001 and the instant building, and thereafter D acquired some shares of the instant land from other co-owners and led to the 153.477/5206 (the minority shares of the instant land).

On September 27, 2013, the Defendant purchased the instant parcels of land and the instant building from D, and completed the registration of ownership transfer. On May 26, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased the instant parcels of land and the instant building at the auction procedure on May 26, 2015.

The F and the other co-owners of land E prior to the subdivision owned the specific parts of each land by classifying them, and registered the co-ownership of the entire land in so-called sectionally owned co-ownership relationship. D, the Defendant, and the Plaintiff succeeded to their status in sequence.

As such, the Plaintiff’s sectionally owned co-ownership relation to the instant land.