1. The plaintiff's lawsuit on the claim for partition of co-owned property against defendant D is dismissed.

2. The real estate listed in the annex list.

1. Determination as to the claim against Defendant B, C, F, and Acceptance Intervenor E and the claim for monetary payment against Defendant D

A. With the exception of adding the fact that Defendant D had completed the registration of transfer of shares to E on March 26, 2019 by the receipt of the registration office of the Incheon District Court (104801, March 20, 2019) on March 20, 2019, which was pending in the instant lawsuit with respect to one-fifth share of the instant real estate among the instant real estate, the registration of transfer of shares was completed on March 20, 2019.

(b) Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act);

C. It is reasonable to view that part of the dismissal of Defendant D and the Intervenor E bears the obligation to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the land rent jointly with the remaining co-owners to the extent of the ownership period of the share in the instant real estate. Thus, the claim for return of unjust enrichment exceeding the above period is dismissed.

2. We examine whether the plaintiff's lawsuit on the part concerning the claim for partition of co-owned property against the defendant D is legitimate or not, as to whether the lawsuit against the defendant D is legitimate or not.

Inasmuch as a co-owner’s claim for partition is an inherent indispensable co-litigation in which all other co-owners are to become the Plaintiff and become a co-defendant, where the whole share of some co-owners is transferred to a third party during the litigation as to a partition of co-owned property, and the previous party who transferred the co-owned share remains without withdrawal, even though the co-owner participated in or participated in the litigation on the partition of co-owned property,

(see Supreme Court Decision 2015Da50293, Feb. 18, 2016). As to the instant case, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit against Defendant D is unlawful, on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s lawsuit against Defendant D is unlawful, since all equity interest in the Health Center and the 1/5 equity interest in the instant real estate was transferred to the assignee during the instant lawsuit pending.

Therefore, this part of the lawsuit by the plaintiff is dismissed.