1. With respect to the area of 942 square meters prior to C in Yangyang-si, the annexed drawing indication 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 22, 18, 19, 20, 21, 21.

The land listed in paragraph (1) of the text of the claim for partition of co-owned property (hereinafter “instant land”) shares 859/942 shares, and the Defendant shares 83/942 shares, respectively, and the fact that consultation on the method of partition of the instant land between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was not reached by the closing date of pleadings in the instant case does not conflict between the parties, or that consultation on the method of partition of the instant land was not reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, may be acknowledged according to the purport

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)

The method of partition of co-owned property may be selected at will if the parties reach an agreement, but if the co-owned property is divided by the judgment because no agreement is reached, the court shall divide it in kind in principle. If it is impossible to divide it in kind or if it is divided in kind in kind, the court may order the auction of the property only when the value might be reduced remarkably.

(1) According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the violation of Article 16(1) of the Civil Act, and by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, and by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, the court below erred by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, and by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal. The court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the ground of appeal.