1. The remaining amount of each real estate listed in the separate sheet after deducting the expenses for auction from the proceeds of auction;

1. Claim for partition of co-owned property

A. As to each real estate listed in the separate list of the facts of recognition (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”), the ownership transfer registration has been completed under the name of I and J (each one-half equity interest) as of April 21, 1995 with respect to each real estate under the name of I and J on April 21, 1995. With respect to each real estate of this case, the compulsory auction procedure was commenced on October 31, 2008 with respect to each real estate of this case to KK at the Gwangju District Court on November 16, 2009. The plaintiff as highest bidder in the above auction procedure completed the compulsory auction procedure and completed the ownership transfer registration in the name of the plaintiff on November 18, 2009. On the other hand, I appears to have acknowledged the remainder between the plaintiff and the defendants under Article 15 of the Civil Procedure Act with the exception of the plaintiff and the defendants who died as the heir on November 12, 199.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of each real estate of this case, may file a claim against the Defendants, who are other co-owners, for the partition of each real estate of this case, under Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

2. The following circumstances are acknowledged to show the purport of the entire pleadings in each of the statements in Articles 1 and 2 of the method of dividing the jointly-owned property Gap, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and each of the real estate of this case is transferred to the land category of the plaintiff and the defendants, and if the land category of this case is divided in kind according to the shares of the plaintiff and the defendants, the area to be acquired after the division is too narrow that the defendants would have no practical usefulness for the defendants. The geographical location of each of the real estate of this case and the surrounding circumstances would have a significant economic difference depending on the location to be acquired by the plaintiff and the defendants. In full view of the plaintiff's intent as shown in the argument of this case,