beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff shall attach the land listed in the separate sheet to the auction and deduct the auction cost from the proceeds.
Reasons
1. In full view of the entries in the evidence Nos. 1 through 3 as well as the purport of the entire pleadings, the facts that the Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”) in proportion to co-ownership shares as stated in the Disposition No. 1 (the Defendant is the heir of the deceased J) and that there was no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants regarding the method of dividing the instant land by the closing date of pleadings in the instant case.
According to the above facts, the plaintiff, who is a co-owner of the land of this case, may claim the partition of the land of this case to the defendant, who is another co-owner, pursuant to Article 269(1)
2. The partition of co-owned property, based on the decision on the method of partition of co-owned property, shall be made by the method of in-kind partition, in principle, insofar as it is possible to make a rational partition according to the shares of each co-owner. However, even if it is impossible in kind or if the price might be reduced remarkably as a result, the auction of the co-owned property shall be ordered, and if it is possible in form, the price shall not be divided in kind, but it shall not be physically strict interpretation, and it shall include cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use situation, use value, etc. of the co-owned property in light of the nature, location, and use value after the
I would like to say.
(2) In the case of this case, the Defendants did not submit any opinion as to the method of partition of the land of this case and it is difficult for the parties to consult on the appropriate method of partition in kind. In light of the fact that it is difficult for the parties to consult on the method of partition in kind, the land of this case constitutes land difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind.
Therefore, the remaining amount of the land of this case, which was put up for auction and deducted the auction cost, shall be the plaintiff and the defendant.