beta
Text
1. The order of each point of 187 square meters, attached Form 2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1, shall be in sequence, 187 square meters, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The instant land is the land owned by the Defendants and E, F, and G, each of 2/10 shares of which was owned by 187 square meters prior to the Jeonnam-gun D (hereinafter “instant land”).
B. On February 20, 2019, the Plaintiff purchased 6/10 of the instant land from E, F, and G except the Defendants, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership on February 25, 2019.
C. From February 2019, around E, F, G and the Defendants agreed to divide 3/5 shares of the instant land sold to the Plaintiff by E, G and the Defendants into the same form as in the annexed Form 1.
However, the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the division method of the instant land until the date of closing argument.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. According to the above facts acknowledged, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the land of this case, may claim the partition of the land of this case against the Defendants, who are other co-owners, pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.
B. (1) In the case of dividing the co-owned property through a trial, if it is impossible to divide it in kind or if it is possible to divide it in kind with the money, the auction of the property may be ordered, and "the price shall not be divided in kind" shall not be physically strict interpretation, and the requirement of "the price shall not be divided in kind" shall include cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide it in kind in light of the nature, location, area, utilization status, use value after the division, etc. of the co-owned property.
However, in the case of dividing the jointly-owned property through a trial, the court is in principle dividing it in kind, so it is a subjective and abstract fact that the co-owners do not agree on the method of division simply without an objective and specific deliberation on the requirements that are not unavoidable to divide the price.