(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2019.05.10 2017가단19530

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2019.05.10 2017가단19530

공유물분할

Text

1. The sale price of the real estate stated in paragraph 1 of the attached list attached to each real estate at auction.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff and the defendant have the right to claim partition of co-owned property, each of 1/2 shares in the attached list No. 1, 1482/162 shares, and 140/162 shares in the attached list No. 2. There is no dispute between the parties.

The fact that the above parties did not reach an agreement on the dividing method of each land of this case is significant in this court.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of each of the above real estates (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant lands”) may file a claim against the Defendant, who is another co-owner, for the partition of each of the instant lands jointly owned pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

2. Method of partition of co-owned property;

(a) The partition of a co-owned property by judgment shall be made by the method of spot partition, or by the method of spot partition, if it is impossible to divide it in kind or even if it is possible in kind, if the price might be reduced remarkably as a result thereof, if the auction of the co-owned property is ordered, and the proceeds thereof shall be divided in installments;

"The price is significantly reduced due to the in-kind division" includes not only the case where the exchange value of the whole co-owned property is significantly reduced due to the in-kind division but also the case where the value of the part to be owned independently due to the in-kind division is significantly reduced compared to the share value in the co-owners before the partition of co-owned property.

Therefore, even if it is possible to divide the article in kind formally, if it is not possible to divide the article in kind according to the ratio of shares of each co-owner in consideration of the location, area and surrounding roads, use value, price, ownership ratio of co-owner and use and profit-making status of each co-owner, it is not necessary to divide the article in kind, but to divide the article jointly owned by the method of payment in kind.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Da30603, Jan. 19, 1993).

참조조문

-민법 제269조 제1항

참조판례

-대법원 1993. 1. 19. 선고 92다30603 판결

유사 판례

-부산지방법원동부지원 2019.07.16 2018가단211961

-대구지방법원 2015.11.27 2015가단111652

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.11.30 2018가단228058

-대구지방법원 안동지원 2018.11.28 2018가단2844

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.11.30 2017가단228198