1. The real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2 shall be put to an auction and the proceeds from the auction shall be deducted;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2 (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) is jointly owned by the Defendants, the Defendant (Appointed Party), and the designated parties (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the Defendants, etc.”) at the corresponding ratio set out in the separate sheet No. 1 through No. 7 of the separate sheet No. 3, and the Plaintiff is jointly owned at the ratio set forth in the separate sheet No. 47858053/503/503497

B. The Plaintiff, the Defendants, etc. did not agree on the method of dividing each of the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Since the Plaintiff, the Defendants, etc. did not reach an agreement on the division of each of the instant real estate, the Plaintiff may file a claim against the Defendants, etc. to divide the said real estate.

On the other hand, since each real estate of this case includes a house and its site, which is unable to divide in kind due to its nature, or is likely to significantly reduce its value due to division, it is reasonable to divide the remaining money after deducting the auction cost from the price by means of an auction to the above parties according to their share of co-ownership.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff’s share ratio with respect to each of the instant real estate was 77858053/503/503549760, but this is contrary to the facts acknowledged by the evidence, and thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion regarding the share exceeding the aforementioned Plaintiff’s share ratio is rejected

3. The plaintiff's claim is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.