beta
Text
1. The remaining amount after deducting the expenses for the auction from the proceeds of sale by selling the real estate listed in the separate sheet;
Reasons
1. According to the purport of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 3 as to real estate stated in the separate sheet, the ownership transfer registration for the reason of "sale on April 6, 1970" was completed in the name of the defendant as of October 4, 1984 as to the real estate stated in the separate sheet No. 18667, which was received on October 4, 1984, and as of June 21, 1996, as of June 21, 1996, as of "the title trust termination of June 18, 1996," the ownership transfer registration for part 11570/1975 of the above ownership was completed in the name of C, and the plaintiff can be recognized as having completed the ownership transfer registration for the reason of the above C's voluntary auction procedure for the entire shares of the above C's real estate stated in the separate sheet as to the registration of ownership transfer for the reason of the above C's completion of the ownership transfer registration for the sale on June 3839, 2019.
Therefore, the Plaintiff may request the Defendant, a co-owner, to divide the real estate stated in the separate sheet.
2. Method of partition;
A. In principle, partition of co-owned property by judgment shall be made in kind as long as a reasonable partition can be made according to the share of each co-owner, but in the payment division, the requirement that “it cannot be divided in kind” is not physically strict interpretation. It includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to conduct partition in kind in light of the nature, location, size, utilization situation of the co-owned property, use value after the partition, etc.
(1) As a matter of principle, the land area acquired by each co-owner shall be equal to the proportion of his/her co-ownership when dividing real estate in kind into real estate (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580, Apr. 12, 2002). Meanwhile, if the form, location, use or economic value of the real estate is not equal, the economic value may be divided to the proportion of shares
Supreme Court Decision 7 December 1993