beta
Text
1. The remainder of the amount obtained by deducting the auction expenses from the proceeds by selling the forest of 49,587 square meters for the forest of Dacheon-si.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff, in fact, owns shares in the instant land, 7932/99174 shares, out of 49,587m2 (hereinafter “instant land”). The Defendants own shares in the instant land as indicated in the separate sheet of shares, as shown in the separate sheet of shares.
There is no partition prohibition agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the land of this case, and no agreement on the partition method of the land of this case has been reached until the date of closing the argument of this case.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the land of this case, may file a claim for partition of co-owned property against the other co-owners pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act. (2) Defendant C and AA, a co-owner of the land of this case, sold specific parts that overlap among the land of this case to buyers, including Defendant C and AA (hereinafter “E”). The above Defendants’ assertion can be understood as the assertion that the Plaintiff cannot file a claim for partition of co-owned property as to the land of this case, since co-owners of the land of this case are currently co-owners of the land of this case, i.e., mutual title trust relationship, mutual title trust relationship.
As to the Defendants’ assertion, it is not sufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff, including Defendant C and A, sold a specific part of the instant land that does not overlap with each other. There is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.
In addition, even if he specified and sold to all the buyers certain parts of the instant land that do not overlap with one another, the Defendants are currently in a divided ownership relationship in relation to the Plaintiff for the following reasons.