beta
Text
1. The remainder of the amount calculated by deducting the auction cost from the proceeds sold by auction to Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government J-gu 88.6 square meters.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions in the evidence Nos. 1 and 3 as well as the overall purport of the pleadings, the facts that the Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the share of co-ownership as stated in the Disposition No. 1 in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant land”) (Defendant E, F, G, H, and I are heir of the network K who owned the share of 18.4/88.4 shares among the real estate listed in the separate sheet) and the fact that no agreement was reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendants as to the method of dividing the instant land by the closing date of the pleadings in the instant case.
According to the above facts, the plaintiff, who is a co-owner of the land of this case, may claim the partition of the land of this case to the defendant, who is another co-owner, pursuant to Article 269(1)
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.
(2) In the case of this case, the Defendants did not submit any opinion as to the method of partition of the land of this case and it is difficult for the parties to consult on the appropriate method of partition in kind. In light of the fact that it is difficult for the parties to consult on the method of partition in kind, the land of this case constitutes land difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind.
Therefore, this case's land is put up for auction and from proceeds.