logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2016.07.05 2014가단40724
공유물분할
Text

1. The Plaintiff shall sell the 13,190 square meters of Tran Forest to an auction at Jeju, and the remaining money which remains after deducting the auction cost from the price.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From September 2003 to November 2003, the Defendants purchased shares at the ratio specified in Paragraph (1) of this Article among the land listed in Paragraph (1) of this Article (hereinafter “instant land”). At that time, they completed each share transfer registration. The Plaintiff completed the share transfer registration with respect to the remaining 2,053/13,190 shares, excluding the total 11,137/13,190 shares acquired by the Defendants among the instant land through public sale procedures around February 2012.

B. The Plaintiff acquired some shares of the instant land and did not reach agreement on the division of the jointly owned property with the Defendants, but filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendants seeking the division of the jointly owned property, and there was no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants as to the method of division of the jointly owned property until the date of closing argument in the instant case.

【Facts without dispute over the ground for recognition, entry of evidence No. 1 and purport of whole pleadings】

2. In principle, the partition of co-owned property by judgment shall be made in kind as long as a reasonable partition can be made according to the share of each co-owner. However, if the partition in kind cannot be made in kind, an auction may be ordered, and in the payment division, the requirement that “it cannot be divided in kind” is not physically strict interpretation. It includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the co-owned property in kind in light of the nature, location, size, situation of use, and use value after the partition, etc. of the co-owner’s share.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the land of this case is between the Plaintiff and the Defendants, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) health care room, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 3, the verification result of this court, and the appraiser U’s appraisal result; and (b) the purport of the entire pleadings.

arrow