logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 서산지원 2018.02.22 2017가단1969
공유물분할
Text

1. Of the maintenance 17,455 square meters in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, each point is indicated in the attached sheet No. 1,2,3,4,10,9,9,8,7, and 1.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant shared 17,455 square meters of land (hereinafter “instant land”) in order to maintain Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do with their respective shares of 1/2.

B. Until the date of the closing of the instant argument, there was no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the method of dividing the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] The entry of Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole argument

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts acknowledged, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the land of this case, may file a claim for partition against the Defendant, a co-owner of the land of this case pursuant to Articles 268 and 269 of the Civil Act.

B. The method of partition of co-owned property (1) is, in principle, the method of partition may be selected at will if the co-owners reach an agreement, but if the co-owned property is divided by a trial due to the failure to reach an agreement, the court shall divide it in kind. The court may order the auction of the property only when the value of the property is likely to be significantly reduced if the co-owned property is divided in kind or in kind. Thus, barring the above circumstances, the court shall make a judgment that recognizes the sole ownership of each co-owner for the divided property by dividing the jointly-owned property into several items in kind according to the share ratio of each co-owner, and the method of partition shall not be applied by the party at the discretion of the court, but shall make a reasonable partition according to the share ratio of the co-owner at the discretion of the court (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Da10183, Jul. 22, 2004). 204; the appraisal of the entire land and the purport of each co-owner's share in kind shall be 7.

arrow