beta
Text
1. The amount remaining after the sale price is deducted from the auction cost by selling D forest land 19041m2 at the Gu-si, Gu-si.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The registration of transfer of ownership was completed on December 17, 1994 with respect to the farmland of 1904m2 (hereinafter “instant forest”) located in the Gu-si, Gu-si, Dong-si, D Do-si (hereinafter “the instant forest”). Defendant C completed the registration of transfer of ownership on August 12, 2013 with respect to E’s share in the instant forest on the grounds of public sale as of August 5, 2013. The Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership on November 13, 2018 with respect to F’s share in the instant forest on the grounds of sale by compulsory auction as of October 16, 2018. The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the instant forest at the share ratio of 1/3 shares.
B. The Plaintiff applied the auction division method, and Defendant B did not reach an agreement on the division method of the forest of this case between the Plaintiff and the Defendants by the date of the closing of argument in this case, as the graves of this case were intended to maintain co-ownership with respect to the forest of this case.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5's statements, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. In light of the above facts, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the forest of this case, may file a claim against the Defendants, other co-owners, for the partition of the forest of this case pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.
B. In principle, the partition of co-owned property by judgment shall be made by the method of in-kind division as long as it is possible to make a reasonable partition according to each co-owner's share. However, even if it is impossible or possible in kind, if the price might be reduced remarkably due to the auction of the co-owned property, the so-called price division shall be made by ordering the auction of the co-owned property and by dividing the price. However, in payment division, the requirement that "it may not be divided in kind" is not physically strict interpretation, but is difficult or inappropriate in light of the nature, location, area, use situation of the co-owned property, and use value after the division.