1. Attached Form 1: The remaining amount after deducting the auction cost from the proceeds of the sale by selling the real estate at auction.

1. In full view of the purport of the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as well as the entire arguments, it is recognized that the original and the Defendant jointly owned each real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter “each land of this case”) according to their respective shares, and each co-owner did not reach an agreement on the division of each land of this case. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of each land of this case, may file a claim for the division against the Defendants, who are co-owners of the other co-owners, pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

Furthermore, in light of all the following circumstances, which are acknowledged as a whole by integrating each of the above evidence and evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5 through 8 as to the method of partition, namely, the land category of this case is a factory site and the number of co-owners is large enough to be contrary to relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Building Act, etc., in the case of spot partition, among the land of this case, the construction of a factory owned by Defendant I on the J land of this case, K is actually being used as a site for the public passage, and K is actually being used as a site. Of each of the land of this case, the right to collateral security against the plaintiff's share is established among the land of this case, the right to claim the transfer of shares of some co-owners, the provisional registration of the right to claim the transfer of shares, and the registration of the seizure is completed, the

2. It is so decided as per Disposition that the land of this case is put up for auction and the amount remaining after deducting the auction cost from the price will be distributed to the plaintiff and the defendant according to their respective shares.