1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiffs' assertion and the defendants shared the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter "the land of this case") according to the ratio of shares in the separate sheet of co-ownership in the annexed sheet of land. The plaintiffs and the defendants sought the division of the jointly owned property by the lawsuit of this case since the consultation on the method of division is not concluded.

B. As to the land of this case asserted by the Defendants, the agreement prohibiting partition exists, and thus, cannot be claimed for the partition of the jointly owned property.

2. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the statements in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul's evidence No. 1, 2, and Eul's evidence No. 1 (including a serial number). In other words, the plaintiffs and the defendants shared the land of this case according to the share ratio in the annexed land No. 1. The plaintiffs and the defendants purchased each house connected to the land of this case from F, G, H (hereinafter "the former co-owners of this case") as co-owners, and they purchased each house of this case from F, G, and H (hereinafter "the former co-owners of this case"). The co-ownership share in the land of this case used as the inside of the above land of this case was also purchased from the former co-owners of this case. In the event of loss of share in the land of this case, some of the above co-owners of this case becomes a blind land, and it seems that there was a non-division agreement between the plaintiffs and the former co-owners of this case as to the land of this case.