1. The plaintiff's lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet shall be put up for auction and proceeds from the sale.

The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “each real estate of this case”) at each share in the separate sheet “shares” in the separate sheet.

(Attachment Table, the part indicated as the Plaintiff’s share in the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor was originally owned by the Plaintiff). The Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor purchased the Plaintiff’s share in each of the instant real estate from the Plaintiff on May 14, 2019, after the instant lawsuit was filed, and completed the registration of transfer on May 27, 2019.

Plaintiff

On July 18, 2019, a successor filed an application for succession intervention.

Plaintiff

After the succeeding intervenor's application for intervention in succession, the plaintiff was unable to withdraw without the consent of all the Defendants.

Plaintiff

There was no agreement between the succeeding intervenor and the Defendants on the method of dividing each of the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole argument as to whether the plaintiff's lawsuit is legitimate or not, the co-owner who claims partition becomes the plaintiff and becomes the plaintiff and the other co-owners shall jointly be the defendant.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da78556, Jan. 29, 2014). However, during the continuation of the instant lawsuit, the entire share of the Plaintiff, a part of the co-owners, was transferred to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff, and the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff, the transferee, succeeded to the instant lawsuit.

If so, the plaintiff who transferred shares to the public remains without withdrawing from the lawsuit of this case even though he is no longer co-owner, so the lawsuit filed by the plaintiff is unlawful.

(see Supreme Court Decision 2015Da50293, Feb. 18, 2016). According to the fact-finding on the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor’s claim, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor may claim against the Defendants the division of each real estate of this case.

If a co-owner is divided by judgment, it shall be limited to the extent that the co-owner is entitled to make a reasonable partition according to his share.