1. The remainder of the amount calculated by deducting the auction cost from the proceeds of selling the Icheon-si and J 101 square meters at auction.

1. According to the purport of Gap 1’s written claim for partition of co-owned property and the purport of the entire pleadings, the plaintiff and the defendants share the share in the "share" in the separate sheet as well as the "share" in the plaintiff and the defendants. Thus, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff and the defendants did not reach an agreement on the method of partition of each of the lands of this case by the date of closing argument of this case. Thus, the plaintiff, co-owner of each of the lands of this case, the co-owner of each of the lands of this case, can file a claim for partition of co-owned property against the defendants, other co-owners, in accordance with Articles 268 and

2. The partition of co-owned property, based on the decision on the method of partition of co-owned property, shall be made by the method of in-kind partition, in principle, insofar as it is possible to make a rational partition according to the shares of each co-owner. However, even if it is impossible in kind or if the price might be reduced remarkably as a result, the auction of the co-owned property shall be ordered, and if it is possible in form, the price shall not be divided in kind, but it shall not be physically strict interpretation, and it shall include cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use situation, use value, etc. of the co-owned property in light of the nature, location, and use value after the

I would like to say.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580 Decided April 12, 2002, etc.). We examine the following circumstances as to the instant land: (a) there are buildings on the ground of each of the instant land; (b) the building is not owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendants; (c) Defendant C, D, E, and F are practically impossible to carry out consultations on the method of partition of each of the instant land because their present whereabouts are not known; and (d) Defendant C, D, E, and F want to take the method of spot partition.