1. The remainder of the amount calculated by deducting the auction cost from the proceeds by selling the forest land of 18472m2 in Gangwon-do to an auction.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff shared 62426/92360 square meters of the Gangwon-do Crossing-gun C forest and 18472 square meters in proportion to the proportion of 2934/92360, and the Defendant shared 7374/10910, and the Defendant owned 3536/10910 square meters of the Gangwon-do Crossing-gun D forest and 1091 square meters in proportion to 7374/10910.

B. The plaintiff demanded the defendant to divide the above real estate into the above real estate. The mediation date more than three times prior to the closing of the argument in this case did not reach an agreement on the method of division between the plaintiff and the defendant, and the plaintiff is opposed to the division in kind at present. The defendant has no intention of transferring the shares, and the plaintiff has no intention of transferring the shares, but has the ability of the defendant to purchase

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff sharing each of the instant real estate and the Defendant did not reach an agreement on the method of partition. Thus, the Plaintiff, co-owner, may file a claim against the Defendant, who is another co-owner, for partition of the instant real estate.

B. In principle, partition of co-owned property based on a judgment on the method of partition of co-owned property shall be divided in kind as long as a reasonable partition can be made according to the share of each co-owner, but the requirement of “shall not be divided in kind” is not physically strict interpretation. It includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind in light of the nature, location, size, utilization situation of the co-owned property, use value after division, etc.

(2) In the case of a co-owner's in-kind, "if the value of the property is likely to decrease substantially if the property is divided in kind" also includes where the value of the property to be owned by the sole owner is likely to decrease significantly more than the value of the property before the division.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580, Apr. 12, 2002).