1. Attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 18, 17, 16, 15, 11, among the area of 1,864 square meters in Jeju Special Self-Governing Province, Jeju Special Self-Governing Province;

1. In full view of the purport of Gap evidence No. 1-5 and the entire arguments as to the claim against defendant B, it is recognized that the plaintiff shared shares of 1,864 square meters prior to D, Jeju Special Self-Governing Province (hereinafter "the land in this case") in 1,782/1,864 and shares of defendant B in 82/1,864, and that the agreement on the division of the land in this case was not reached between the plaintiff and the defendant B by the date of closing argument in this case.

According to the above facts, the Plaintiff, as co-owner, may claim a partition of the land of this case against the Defendant B. In full view of various circumstances revealed in the pleadings of this case, such as the ratio of the Plaintiff’s share to the land of this case and Defendant B’s co-ownership, and the developments leading to the completion of the registration of co-ownership, the land of this case shall

2. In full view of the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 4-1 and 2 as to the claim against the defendant C, the defendant C is the owner of the non-authorized building D and E in Jeju-si adjacent to the land of this case, and the fact that the portion of "b" part 18 square meters in the ship connected in order to each of the above non-authorized building is 17, 12, 13, 14, and 17, among the above non-authorized buildings, is 18 square meters in possession of 18 square meters in the land of this case.

According to the above facts, Defendant C, as the owner of the above unauthorized building, has interfered with the Plaintiff’s exercise of ownership by occupying 18 square meters out of the land of this case. Thus, Defendant C, in turn, has the duty to remove 18 square meters in part of “bbbbb” connected to the above unauthorized building, in order to which each point of the aforementioned unauthorized building is indicated in attached Table 2, 17, 12, 13, 14, and 17, and to deliver part of “b” in attached Table 2, among the land of this case to the Plaintiff.

Defendant C asserts to the effect that the above claim of the Plaintiff constitutes an abuse of rights as it is not allowed by social norms.

If the exercise of rights constitutes abuse of rights, the exercise of rights is subjective.