logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.04.28 2019가단108601
공유물분할
Text

1. The attached appraisal map No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 27, 28, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 26, 26, 3, 24, 25, 24, 25, 26, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2,

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. K and the Defendants shared the share of 1/2, 1/4, and 1/4 of the area of 3,498 square meters in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. K died on March 17, 2001, and the plaintiffs are the net K's property successors.

The inheritance shares of the plaintiffs are 1/6 each.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion

A. The plaintiffs and the defendants own the land of this case on the basis of the line connecting each point of 27,28 marks on the attached sheet No. 27, 28.

B. The Plaintiffs and the Defendants seek division as the phenomenon of partitioned ownership of the instant land.

3. The principle is to divide the article jointly owned by the court in kind in a case where the co-owners voluntarily choose a method if the agreement is reached between the co-owners, but if the article jointly owned is divided by trial due to the lack of agreement.

4. Determination

A. In full view of the facts acknowledged in the above legal doctrine as seen earlier, the Plaintiff, co-owner of the instant land, and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the method of partition of the instant land. Therefore, the Plaintiff may claim a partition of co-owned land in the court pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. Circumstances revealed during the process of partition, i.e., the Plaintiff’s joint ownership even after the partitioning of the instant land, and ii) the Defendant did not appear on the date of pleading after receiving the complaint of this case and did not appear on the date of pleading. It can be inferred that there is no disagreement as to the Plaintiffs’ claim. iii) The Plaintiff and the Defendants can be seen as occupying each specific part of the instant land under divided ownership, and as a matter of principle, divided the instant land into two parts in kind.

arrow