logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.09.12 2016가단339074
공유물분할
Text

1. The remaining amount after deducting the expenses for the auction from the proceeds of the sale by selling the real estate listed in the annex 2 list;

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) at the ratio of Plaintiff 1,653/53,058 shares, and co-ownership shares listed in the Defendants’ separate sheet No. 3.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendants did not agree on the division of the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant real estate, may claim the division of the instant real estate against the Defendants, who are other co-owners, pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

(b) In the case of dividing the jointly-owned property by a trial, it is in principle dividing it in kind, and if it is impossible to divide it in kind or it is possible to divide it in kind in kind, the value thereof is likely to be reduced remarkably, the auction of the goods may be ordered to be paid in kind;

In this context, the requirement is not physically strict interpretation, but includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the property in kind in light of the nature, location, area, current use, value of use after the division.

The phrase "if the value of the portion is to be reduced remarkably if it is divided in kind" includes the case where the value of the portion to be owned by the owner is likely to be reduced significantly than the value of the share before the division even if the co-owner is a person.

The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the descriptions and images of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including the number of branch numbers) and the fact-finding results with respect to the plane captain-gun in Busan Metropolitan City, namely, the case of dividing land into a green area without obtaining permission, authorization, etc. under the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, according to the Urban Planning Ordinance of Busan Metropolitan City:

arrow