beta
Text
1. The money remaining after selling 5,424 square meters of C forest land at auction in Sungsung-si after deducting the auction expenses from the price;
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff, Selected D, and the Defendant shared 1/3 shares of 5,424 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) of forest C in Sungsung-si.
B. Until the closing date of the instant argument, there was no agreement between the Plaintiff, Appointor D, and the Defendant regarding the method of dividing the instant land, and there was no separate agreement regarding the use of the instant land, but there was no special agreement that does not divide the instant land.
[Grounds for recognition] The items of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff, the co-owner of the instant land, and the Appointor D may claim the partition of the instant land against the Defendant, the other co-owner.
B. Furthermore, in full view of the following circumstances as to the method of partition as to the method of partition of co-owned property, Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the entire pleadings, i.e., ① specific partition consultation is considerably difficult as a result of the litigation in this case by public notice as to the defendant's share was not served in the lawsuit in this case. ② In particular, since the registration of creation of mortgage over the defendant's share among the land in this case was completed on July 17, 2015, the auction division is inevitable due to the registration of creation of mortgage over the mortgagee E and maximum debt amount of KRW 150 million (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Da30603, Jan. 19, 193). Thus, since it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the land in this case as the method of in-kind division is difficult or inappropriate to maintain the utility value of the land in this case, the land in this case is sold at an auction at an objective and justifiable price and then the remaining amount remaining after deducting the auction cost from the auction cost is determined as reasonable and reasonable method to divide.
3. Conclusion, as to the land of this case.