1. 6,470 square meters of G forest in Kimpo-si shall be put to an auction and the remainder after deducting the auction cost from the price shall be attached.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the instant land according to the share ratio indicated in the separate sheet.

B. There was no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the division of co-owned property until now.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant land, may file a claim for partition of the instant real estate jointly owned against the Defendants, another co-owner, pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. 1) As to the instant case, a method of partition of co-owned property cannot be divided in kind or in kind if the value of the co-owned property is likely to be significantly reduced, an auction of the property may be ordered, and the requirement of “undivided in kind” is not physically strict interpretation, but it includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the property in kind in light of the nature, location, size, utilization situation, use value after the partition, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da40219, 40226, Sept. 10, 2009). The Plaintiff filed a claim for payment in kind in the first place and in preliminary place, but during the proceeding of pleadings, the Plaintiff asserted the method of payment in kind without consistently presenting a detailed method of payment in kind, and there is no discussion about the division in kind between the parties to the instant land, the size of the land in question and the Defendants’ specific method of payment in kind by the date of closing argument between the Plaintiff and the Defendants.