beta
Text
1. The amount remaining after deducting the auction expense from the proceeds sold by selling the 1878m2 to the auction of the paddy-gun, Jeonnam-gun.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff (Appointeds) and the appointed parties and the Defendant (hereinafter collectively referred to as “co-owners”) share the real estate indicated in the Disposition No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) according to co-ownership shares as indicated in the Disposition No. 1.
B. Co-owners did not reach a sectional agreement on the instant land.
[Grounds for recognition] Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole argument
2. As a matter of principle, the method of partition of co-owned property based on the judgment on the cause of the claim is to be divided in kind as far as it is possible to make a reasonable partition according to the share of each co-owner. However, if it is impossible to divide in kind or in kind or if it is apprehended that the value might be significantly reduced, an auction may be ordered to divide in kind. In the price division, the requirement that “it is not possible to divide in kind” is not physically strict interpretation, but it includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use situation of the co-owned property, and use value after the division.
(2) Article 22(2) of the Farmland Act provides that “The land in this case is a land for which a project for improving agricultural production infrastructure has been implemented under the Rearrangement of Agricultural and Fishing Villages Act” and Article 22(2) of the same Act provides that “The land in this case shall be divided into two parts after the division, and the land in this case shall not be divided into two parts after the division, and the land in this case shall not be divided into two parts after the division, and the land in this case shall not be divided into two parts after the division, and it is obvious that all co-owners shall own less than 200 square meters in area according to their share ratio. Therefore, the land in this case shall not be divided into two parts, and it is reasonable to put it into an auction and distribute the proceeds therefrom to co-ownership.”
3. Conclusion, this case.