1. The amount of 1430 square meters of the Incheon Gyeyang-gu D Forest land shall be put to an auction and the auction expenses shall be deducted from the price;

1. In full view of the overall purport of the statements and arguments as stated in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, it is recognized that the plaintiff and defendant Eul-gu Incheon Gyeyang-gu shares 51/1569 square meters of D forest land (hereinafter "the land in this case"), 12/523 shares in the Republic of Korea, 12/523 shares in the defendant (appointed party) and the appointed party E shares 102/10983 shares, 153/10983 shares, and that the designated party F did not reach an agreement on the method of dividing the land in this case by the date of the closing of argument in this case.

According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff may claim a partition of co-owned property on the instant land against the Defendants, the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the designated parties.

2. The method of partition of co-owned property shall, in principle, be divided in kind, but the court may order an auction of things, if it is impossible to divide in kind or if the value thereof might be reduced remarkably in kind;

(Article 269(2) of the Civil Code. Here, the requirement that "shall not be divided in kind" is not a physically strict interpretation, but it includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the article in kind in light of the nature, location, area, situation of use, value of use after the division, etc. of the article jointly owned.

(2) In light of the following circumstances, the Defendant’s military unit affiliated with the Republic of Korea used the instant land as a shooting range shooting boat and a stop, and the use of the land seems impossible as well as the general public’s access, and the parties did not present specific measures to divide the land in kind, and even the Defendants, Defendant (Appointed Party), and the designated parties did not express their intent to purchase the Plaintiff’s share, comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) the Defendant’s military unit affiliated with the Republic of Korea used the instant land as a shooting range shooting boat and a stop; and (b) the Defendant, the Defendant, and the designated parties did not express their intent to purchase the Plaintiff’s share.