1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant's Seoul Northern District Court on August 13, 2009 against the plaintiffs.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. In the case of the claim for partition of co-owned property, Seoul Northern District Court 2007Gahap2477 decided on August 13, 2009 (hereinafter "the first instance judgment"), 13 persons, including the plaintiffs, (hereinafter "the plaintiff group") filed against 34 persons, including the defendant (hereinafter "the defendant group"), the above court sentenced the judgment to the following purport (hereinafter "the judgment"), and the above judgment was finally served on the parties on September 29, 2009.

Based on the part possessed as of the date of closing argument, the plaintiff group shall own the specific part and own the remaining part according to the share, and the other part shall be divided in kind by the defendant group, but as a result of the division in kind, the part divided in excess of the share of the plaintiff group shall be compensated by the value to the defendant group of the judgment.

Accordingly, the order of the compensation portion between the plaintiffs and the defendant of this case was "The plaintiff of this case (including the plaintiffs of this case) to pay 53,212,015 won per annum to the defendant of this case and 5% per annum from the day after the day when this decision became final and conclusive to the day of complete payment."

B. The plaintiffs of this case and part of the defendant et al. of this case among the plaintiffs of this case and the defendant et al. of this case were dissatisfied with the judgment of the court of first instance before the reversal and remanded. The plaintiffs of this case were withdrawn from appeal and some of the decision of the court of first instance were withdrawn during the appellate trial as Seoul High Court 2009Na93529.

Accordingly, only some appeals have been maintained among the defendant's judgment, including the defendant in this case, and the above appellate court rendered a judgment of the appellate court to the effect that the judgment of the first instance was modified on August 17, 2012 and the auction division was conducted.

C. The judgment of the Supreme Court on the final appeal is above B.

the appellate court under subsection (1).