logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2015.05.19 2014가단43518
공유물분할
Text

1. Each real estate listed in the attached real estate list shall be put to an auction and the auction expenses shall be deducted from the proceeds of the auction;

Reasons

1. Basic facts are: (a) the Plaintiff and the Defendants, as their brothers and sisters, inherited each real estate listed in the annexed real estate list (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from their parents and owned the instant real estate as shares such as shares indicated in the annexed inheritance shares sheet; (b) the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not enter into an agreement or separate agreement on partition of co-owned property among the parties not to partition the instant real estate; or (c) the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not have any dispute between the parties, or can be acknowledged by the purport of the entries

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the plaintiff has the right to claim a partition of co-owned property against the defendants, and the land among the real estate in this case is the site of the building, and the building is a house, factory, etc. as a single floor, so it is anticipated that the property value will be reduced because each part of the divided in kind can not be used independently, unless the plaintiff and the defendants make an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants. In fact, it is impossible to divide the co-owned property in kind, the plaintiff wanting to make a partition of co-owned property by the auction method rather than the partition in kind, and some defendants do not raise any objection, and all parties do not present any other method of partition. In light of all the circumstances such as the location and size of the real estate in this case as shown in the argument in this case, since the real estate in this case constitutes a case where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind due to its nature, it is sold the real estate in this case by auction, and then it is the most equitable and reasonable method to distribute

B. As to this, Defendant E asserts to the effect that it should be divided together with other inherited property, but even if there are multiple co-owners, they are co-owners.

arrow