1. The plaintiff A's lawsuit against the defendants is dismissed.

2. Part 1 of Annex 1, among the 36,115 square meters of M forest in Ansan-si, part 1.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On or around March 2, 1996, Plaintiff A, Defendant D, E, G, H, J, K, K, P, and Q purchased each share transfer registration as indicated in the “public land share” column as indicated below on March 12, 1996. (B) On November 4, 2015, Plaintiff B, and P were Defendant C on November 12, 1998; Defendant F on June 20, 201; Q, on January 27, 201, Defendant L acquired each share transfer registration in the instant real estate from among the instant real estate to Defendant L on January 27, 201, and on January 27, 201, Plaintiff A succeeded to the instant lawsuit (hereinafter “the Intervenor succeeding to the lawsuit”).

The registration of the transfer of the pertinent co-ownership among the instant real estate was completed to the public.

C. As of the date of the closing of argument in the instant case, the Plaintiff B, the succeeding intervenor, and the Defendants own each share indicated in the column of “public share” indicated below among the instant real estate.

As of March 2, 1996 as of the date of the closure of the co-owner's argument as of March 2, 1996, Co-owners 3891/3615 Plaintiff A’s Intervenor 3891/36115 N Plaintiff B 356/36115 N, Defendant D 3146/36115 Defendant E- 3146/3615 P 2248/3615, Defendant G 4959/36115, Defendant H 1653/3615, Defendant I 1653/3615, Defendant J. 1653/3615, Defendant J. 1615, Defendant J. 205/3615, Defendant D 3615, Defendant D 205/3615.

D. There is no partition prohibition agreement between the Plaintiff B, the succeeding intervenor and the Defendants on the instant real estate, and there is no agreement on the partition and method.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul's evidence Nos. 1, Eul's evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. We examine the legitimacy of the Plaintiff A’s lawsuit ex officio on the determination of the legitimacy of the Plaintiff’s lawsuit.

The lawsuit claiming partition of co-litigation is an inherent indispensable co-litigation in which a co-owner who claims partition becomes the plaintiff and all other co-owners should become a co-defendant, and the Supreme Court on January 29, 2014.