1. The remaining amount of each real estate listed in the separate sheet after deducting the expenses for auction from the proceeds of auction;

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant share each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) at the ratio of 1/2 shares, respectively.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant did not reach an agreement on the method of dividing the instant real estate until the closing date of the instant argument.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-3, Gap evidence 2-1-3, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts acknowledged as above, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant real estate, may file a claim for partition of the instant real estate against the Defendant, who is another co-owner pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. According to a judgment on partition of co-owned property, if the co-owned property is divided in kind, in principle, or if it is impossible to divide in kind or in kind, or if the value thereof might be significantly reduced, an auction of the co-owned property may be ordered. Here, the requirement includes cases where it is physically impossible to divide the co-owned property, and where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the property in kind in light of the nature, location or size of the property, the situation of use, the use after the division, and the use value after the division. Further, the requirement includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the co-owned property in kind even if the co-owner's share is divided in kind, if the value of the portion to be owned by the sole owner might be significantly reduced compared to the share value of the property before the division (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da56297, Dec. 10, 2015).