1. Of the land size of 162 square meters in Sejong-do, Gangwon-do, each point is indicated in the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 11, 4, 5, 10, 9, 14, and 1.

In full view of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4 and the purport of the entire argument as a result of the commission of appraisal to the Young-dong Vice Governor of the Korea Land Information Corporation in this Court, 79/162 of the CJ 162 square meters (hereinafter "the land in this case"), the plaintiff owns 83/162 shares, and the plaintiff owns D site adjacent to the land in this case, and the building owned by the plaintiff is constructed over the part of the land in this case. The defendant owns E site adjacent to the land in this case, and the building owned by the defendant is constructed on the land in this case, and the building owned by the defendant is located on the land in this case, and there is no agreement prohibiting division between the plaintiff and the defendant.

According to such factual relations, barring any special circumstance, it is determined that dividing the portion 1, 79 square meters indicated in the attached Form No. 1 among the instant land into the Plaintiff’s ownership, and then dividing the portion 83 square meters in the attached Form No. 83 square meters into the Defendant’s ownership in accordance with their respective equity ratios,

Therefore, the defendant asserted that the plaintiff and the defendant could not respond to the above division claim by asserting that they were in co-ownership relation between the plaintiff and the defendant, and therefore, in full view of the entries in Eul and Eul No. 4 as well as the images in Eul No. 1 as well as the result of the on-site inspection in this court, the part of 111m2 in the ship connecting each point of the attached drawing No. 111m2 (hereinafter referred to as "the part in the defendant's possession") among the land in this case as of November 23, 1970 is possessed and used by the defendant, and the defendant's father G purchased and used the building constructed in the part in the defendant's possession among the land in this case as of November 23, 2016 and removed the building in this case from the defendant's share of 83/162.