Attached Form

The real estate stated in the list shall be owned by the plaintiff in installments.

The plaintiff is against the defendants each of 37,494,947.

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in Gap evidence 1-1 through 4, the facts that the plaintiff and the defendants shared real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as the "real estate of this case"), the plaintiff 17/19, and the defendants shared at the proportion of 1/19, respectively, may be acknowledged, and there is no agreement between the co-owners or no agreement prohibiting division.

Therefore, pursuant to Articles 268 and 269 of the Civil Act, the Plaintiff, a co-owner, may seek a partition of the instant real estate against the Defendants.

As to the method of partition of co-owned property, in full view of the following circumstances, which can be seen by comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence No. 2, the real estate of this case is the building site and its ground building, and its opinion on the division in kind does not coincide with the opinion on the division in the case of dividing it in kind; the plaintiff sought a partition by full-value compensation; the defendant C does not clearly express his objection; and the location, size, use status, value of the real estate of this case after division, co-owners’ share relation, etc., it is reasonable that the real estate of this case is owned solely by the plaintiff and the plaintiff compensates the defendants for the value of the share.

On the other hand, comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire pleadings as to Gap evidence Nos. 3-1 through 3, the value of each share of the defendants with respect to the real estate of this case is KRW 37,494,947.

Thus, the real estate of this case is divided into two parts, and the real estate of this case is divided into two parts, which order the plaintiff to pay the above money for full price compensation to the defendants.