1. Of the real estate listed in the table Nos. 1, No. 2, 3, 4, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 26 of the Attached Table No. 2;

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. According to Gap evidence No. 1 (including the paper number), the plaintiff's share of 18/162, defendant Eul, and Eul's share of 9/162, defendant D, E, F, G, H, and I's share of 18/162, each of the share of 6/162 shares, defendant J's share of 6/162, defendant K, L, L, and M are co-ownership of each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 in proportion to the share of 4/162, each of the share of 4/162 shares, and the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants on the method of dividing the land of this case was not reached by the closing date of pleadings of this case. Thus, the plaintiff, co-owner of the land of this case, as

B. Defendant B, E, and H submitted a written reply to the effect that the above real property is owned by the Plaintiff by dividing them into real estate Nos. 1 in the annexed list No. 1 and owned by the Plaintiff. As to the Plaintiff’s primary purport of claim that the above real estate is owned by the Plaintiff, the pertinent real estate is divided into the land adjacent to the Plaintiff’s meritorious service, and the real estate Nos. 2 through 5 in accordance with the Plaintiff’s primary purport of claim. However, the remaining Defendants did not submit a written response. The remaining Defendants, other than the Plaintiff, K, L, and M, among the real estate Nos. 1 and 3 in the annexed list No. 3 in the annexed list No. 1 and 1,196 square meters in size, shall be the Plaintiff’s ownership, the remaining parts of the real estate, and the list No. 1,2,4, and5 real estate owned by the Defendants by shares. Considering the fact that the area of the attached list No. 3 is less than 1,196 square meters in width, the remaining portion of the real estate.