The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the defendant (appointed party) and the appointed party, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2

A. In order to establish sectional ownership for one building, there must be only one building in an objective and physical aspect, and separate sections of the building should be independent in structure and use, as well as physically partitioned parts of the building should be the objects of sectional ownership.

Here, the act of partitioning is a kind of legal act, without changing the physical form and quality of a building, intended to divide a specific part of the building into an object of separate ownership under the legal concept, and is not a special restriction on the time and method, but it is recognized when the intention of the disposal authority is objectively indicated.

Therefore, even before the physical completion of a sectioned building, if the intention of division is objectively indicated that the future new building is a sectioned building through the application for building permission or the contract for sale in lots, the existence of the act of division can be recognized. If the subsequent building and a sectioned building corresponding to the act of division are completed objectively and physically, even if the building is registered in the collective building ledger or it is not registered in the register as a sectioned building, the sectional ownership is established at that time.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2010Da71578, Jan. 17, 2013). B.

The court below held that although the building of this case was not completed at the time of the compulsory auction procedure of this case, from the time when the building permit was granted to the owner of this case, it seems evident that the owner of this case, who sought to become the object of sectional ownership, is the defendant (appointed party), the appointed party, Q of the court below, the co-defendant of the court below, and D's intent. The building of this case was a multi-household building scheduled to be the first and the sixth floor above the ground, which had already been completed with the 5th floor above the ground as of November 203, and some households, such as columns, walls, and 201 and 202.