beta
Text
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
Of K forest land 991m2, each of the attached Form 1, 2, 7, 6, and 1 shall be attached hereto.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff, Appointed Co., Ltd. and the Defendants shared the forest of this case.
B. The above co-owners did not reach an agreement on the method of dividing the forest of this case.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 (including virtual number), Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment as to the claim for partition of co-owned property
A. Division of the jointly-owned property may be selected at will if the co-owners reach an agreement, but if the jointly-owned property is divided by a trial due to the failure to reach an agreement, the court shall, in principle, divide it in kind. It is possible to order the auction of the goods only when it is impossible to divide it in kind or when the value is considerably reduced if it is divided in kind. Thus, barring the above circumstances, the court shall render a judgment that recognizes the sole ownership of each co-owner for the divided property by dividing the jointly-owned property into several goods in kind in accordance with the share ratio of co-owners.
In addition, the method of division is not a way requested by the parties, but a reasonable division is made according to the share ratio of co-owners depending on the overall circumstances of the things which are co-ownership relations or objects at the discretion of the court. In the case of the division of goods jointly owned by many people in kind, it is permitted to divide the goods in kind within the share limit of the claimant for partition and the remaining co-owners who do not want the division are allowed to remain in common (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da23428, Mar. 26, 2015)
The Plaintiff, a co-owner of the forest of this case, did not reach an agreement on the method of partition, as in the above facts acknowledged. Thus, the Plaintiff, a co-owner, may file a claim for judicial partition against the Defendants, who are other co-owners of the forest of this case.
As to the method of dividing the forest of this case.