1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim B shall be dismissed.

2. The real estate listed in the annex Nos. 1 and 2 shall be put up for auction.

A principal lawsuit or counterclaim shall be deemed to be a same.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. As to the instant real estate, the registration of ownership of each share of the Plaintiff, Defendant C, and Defendant B’s 2/4 was completed, and the relevant real estate is owned by the Defendants one-half of the total amount of land of 1,269 square meters (hereinafter “third real estate”) located in the center of the real estate in the attached list No. 2 in the Cheongju-si located in the center of the real estate in the attached list No. 2.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendants demanded the division of each of the instant real estate owned by their respective owners, but did not reach an agreement on the method of division of the instant real estate between three parties until the date of closing the argument.

【Fact-finding, Gap 1 and 6’s statements (including additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the claim for partition of co-owned property, Defendant C filed a counterclaim claiming partition by means of auction or partition, not in kind, as presented by the Plaintiff, in which the Plaintiff presented a specific method of partition against the Defendants regarding the instant real property.

The lawsuit for partition of co-owned property is different if the co-owned property is identical to the co-owned property subject to partition.

Even in the same lawsuit, the counterclaim raised by Defendant C during the continuation of the principal lawsuit seeking a partition of co-owned property as to the instant real estate is unlawful as a duplicate lawsuit.

3. The Plaintiff asserted that, around the first 1976, part of the instant real estate as Defendant B’s proposal was agreed to divide co-owned property into co-owned property by specifying and occupying each co-owned part, taking into account each part of the instant real estate, and thus, it should be divided as stated in the purport of the claim. However, the Plaintiff asserted that, after Defendant C’s counterclaim was instituted, the Plaintiff sought the implementation of the ownership transfer registration procedure based on the completion of possession as it is, and sought the registration of ownership transfer.