A claim for the right to use common property jointly owned by a co-owner in proportion to the share of the co-owner's property.

When one co-owner of a real estate requests the other co-owner to order the whole co-owner of the article jointly owned, the claim for the right to use the article jointly owned shall be deemed to include the claim in proportion to the share.

Article 263 of the Civil Act

Ethiopia

Park Jin-jin

Seoul District Court Decision 4294 civil defense 1784 delivered on December 20, 1962, including Seoul High Court Decision 201Da1784 delivered on December 20, 1962

We reverse the original judgment.

The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The plaintiff's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the judgment of the court below, the plaintiff asserted that the co-owner on the site and building of this case is the co-owner's act of preserving co-owned properties, and that the plaintiff is also the co-owner of the building site and building of this case, but the defendant is also the co-owner, such as exhibition, so the plaintiff cannot seek the whole name, and the plaintiff's assertion is also without merit, unless there is any proof that the defendant violated the agreement between the original defendant and the original defendant.

However, according to Article 263 of the Civil Code, co-owners can enjoy profits from the whole co-ownership at the share ratio. Thus, the plaintiff's claim for the right to use the co-ownership at the share ratio shall be deemed to include the plaintiff's claim. Therefore, the court below's rejection of the plaintiff's claim entirely without examining in detail what kind of land can be used by the share ratio of co-owners, and there is a reason to discuss this point.

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges pursuant to Article 406 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act by omitting an explanation of the debate on other appeals.

The judge of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Dog-Jak and Mag-Jak, the maximum leapbal leapbal leaps