1. The real estate indicated in the annexed real estate shall be put to an auction and the auction expenses shall be deducted from the proceeds of sale;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant are co-owners of each real estate indicated in the indication of the attached real estate (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and their co-ownership is 2/15 of the Plaintiff, and 13/15 of the Defendant.

B. On April 17, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a pre-sale agreement with C on the share of 2/15 owned by the Plaintiff among the instant real estate, and the provisional registration of the Plaintiff’s right to claim a transfer of the Plaintiff’s share was completed on April 17, 2015 with the Changwon District Court Jinju Branch Branch of Seoul District Court (20764), and C consented to the division of the price by auction of the instant real estate.

C. The Plaintiff and the Defendant did not agree not to divide the instant real estate, but did not agree on the method of division.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above facts acknowledged as above, since an agreement on the method of partition between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, a co-owner of the instant real estate, was not reached, the Plaintiff may file a judicial claim against the Defendant for partition pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. According to the evidence evidence No. 1, the real estate of this case is recognized as housing and its site, so it is inappropriate to divide the real estate of this case in kind in light of its nature, location, area, utilization status, use value after division, etc., or if divided in kind, it is likely that the value will be significantly reduced if it is divided in kind.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580 delivered on April 12, 2002). Therefore, it is reasonable to divide the instant real estate by means of a method of payment by auction under Article 269(2) of the Civil Act.

3. The conclusion is that the real estate of this case is sold at auction and the remainder after deducting the auction cost from the price is distributed to the plaintiff and the defendant in proportion to their shares.