1. The amount of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 119 square meters which is placed at an auction and the remainder after deducting the auction expenses from the price.

1. Of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, which established the right to claim partition of co-owned property, 26/36 shares out of 119 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) are owned by the Plaintiff. The remaining 10/36 shares are owned by the Defendant, and the fact that consultation on the method of partition between the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not lead to an agreement on the method of partition may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings on the entry of evidence No.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, a co-owner, may request the Defendant to divide the land of this case, which is jointly owned.

2. Method of partition of co-owned property;

A. In principle, the partition of co-owned property by judgment shall be made in kind as long as a reasonable partition can be made according to the share of each co-owner, or in the case of a co-owner unable to divide in kind or the value thereof may be reduced remarkably due to the division, the court may order an auction of the goods (Article 269(2) of the Civil Act), and the requirement that "it cannot be divided in kind" should not be physically strict interpretation, but it shall include cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to conduct the partition in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use status, and use value after the division, etc. of the co-owner.

(2) If the value of the portion to be owned independently by the division is likely to be significantly reduced due to the division, it includes the case where the value of the portion to be owned by the owner is likely to be significantly reduced than the value of the share before the division, even if the person is a co-owner.

(2) In this case, the Plaintiff’s share of the Plaintiff among the land of this case is subject to the right to collateral security (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580, Apr. 12, 2002). The Plaintiff’s share of the Plaintiff is subject to the right to collateral security (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580, Apr. 12, 2002).