1. The part against Defendant C among the instant lawsuit is dismissed.

2. It shall be marked with E Forest land 14,829 square meters and with annexed drawings 1.

1. We examine ex officio determination as to the legitimacy of the part against Defendant C among the instant lawsuit, as to the legitimacy of the part against Defendant C among the instant lawsuit.

A lawsuit seeking partition of co-litigation is an inherent indispensable co-litigation in which a co-owner who claims partition becomes the Plaintiff and all other co-owners are to become a co-defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da78556, Jan. 29, 2014). Thus, where a part of co-owners’ share is transferred to a third party while the lawsuit regarding partition of co-owned property is pending, and the co-owner’s share is transferred to a third party, and the previous party who transferred the co-owned share remains without withdrawing, the part concerning the previous party who did not withdraw

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire argument in the statement as to No. 8, 14,829 square meters of E forest and field E, Defendant C, a co-owner of the instant lawsuit, was transferred to Defendant C’s succeeding intervenor D and completed the share transfer registration on August 11, 2015 during the instant lawsuit, and Defendant C’s succeeding intervenor C’s succeeding to Defendant C’s succeeding to Defendant C on January 29, 2016, thereby becoming a party to the lawsuit by means of succession participation, and the fact that Defendant C did not withdraw from the instant lawsuit, can be acknowledged.

According to the above facts of recognition, since Defendant C remains without withdrawal from the lawsuit even though it is no longer co-owner, this part of the lawsuit is deemed unlawful.

2. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement in Gap evidence No. 8 regarding the claim against the succeeding intervenor Eul, Defendant Eul and Eul, the following facts are acknowledged: (a) the Plaintiff shared the Plaintiff’s share of 14,829m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) on June 6, 191, 150 shares; (b) Defendant B’s share of 3306/15090 shares; and (c) Defendant C’s succeeding intervenor D’s share of 5172/4,15090 shares.