1. Defendant C’s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by Defendant C.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The deceased on November 16, 2012, the network He owned the instant real estate, and jointly succeeded to the Plaintiff’s deceased Party A (hereinafter “the deceased”) prior to the litigation process, his sibling, and the Defendants jointly succeeded to the deceased’s property.

After that, the deceased A and the Defendants shared 1/4 shares of each of the instant real estate through the adjudication on division of inherited property (Korean Government District Court Decision 2012Rahap73 dated May 14, 2015).

In relation to the Supreme Court Decision 2015Da18367 Decided August 13, 2015, the instant claim is not a claim under Article 1013(2) of the Civil Act (the family court’s exclusive jurisdiction) but a claim under Article 268 of the Civil Act, so long as the deceased and the Defendants have already been tried to divide inherited property as above.

On January 28, 2016, the deceased Party A died, and the Plaintiff’s attorney-at-law (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) succeeded to the property of the deceased Party A solely.

Until the end of the trial proceedings, the agreement on the method of dividing the real estate of this case was not reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendants.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap 1, 3, and 5 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of recognition, as long as the agreement on the method of dividing the real estate of this case has not been reached, the plaintiff may request the court to divide the real estate of this case.

(Article 269(1) of the Civil Act. Furthermore, in relation to the method of partition, the division of co-owned property cannot be divided in kind or in kind, or in case of the division in kind, if the value thereof might be reduced remarkably, the court may order the auction of the co-owned property to pay in installments (Article 269(2) of the Civil Act); and in case of the division in kind, it includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to pay in kind in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use status, use value, etc. of the co-owned property in light of the nature, location, and use value after the division.

However, the real estate of this case is divided into apartment bonds in kind due to its nature.