1. The amount of the real estate listed in the separate sheet 1 remaining after deducting the expenses for the auction from the proceeds thereof;

1. Recognizing facts, the real estate listed in the attached list 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) is jointly owned by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party), the Appointed Party (hereinafter “Plaintiff, etc.”) and the Defendant in proportion to the shares listed in the attached list 2.

Plaintiff

There is no agreement as to the method of partition of co-owned property as to the land of this case between the defendant and the defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff et al., as the co-owned share holder of the land of this case, may file a claim for partition of the land of this case with the defendant pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act, and the agreement on partition of co-owned property was not formed. Thus, the plaintiff et al.'s

B. As to the method of partition of co-owned land, the following circumstances recognized by the aforementioned evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, the land in this case is deemed as having difficulty in fairly dividing the land in kind according to the respective share ratio between the Plaintiff, etc. and the Defendant, considering the individual size, shape, and size of shares owned by the Plaintiff, etc. and the Defendant as the site. In light of the method of partition of co-owned land, it is difficult or inappropriate to ensure fair partition among co-owners while maintaining the utility value of the land in this case, by means

Therefore, since it is the most equitable and reasonable method to divide the price through an auction, it is to divide the land of this case into an auction and the remaining amount after deducting the auction cost from the price, in the proportion of the shares of the plaintiff, etc. and the defendant.

3. The claim against the defendant by the plaintiff et al. against the plaintiff et al. shall be accepted on the grounds of their reasoning, and the costs of the lawsuit shall be borne individually in consideration of the circumstances surrounding