Attached Form

1 Each real estate listed in the list shall be put to an auction and the remainder after deducting the auction cost from the proceeds.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) at the respective rates listed in the separate sheet No. 2.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on subdivision of each of the instant real estate, and there is no agreement on subdivision prohibition.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings, defendant D, E, and F: Judgment of deemed confession (Articles 208(3)2 and 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act) by service by public notice (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of each real estate of this case, may request the Defendants, other co-owners, to divide each real estate of this case pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

The method of partition of co-owned property by judgment shall be, in principle, divided in kind as long as it is possible to make a reasonable partition according to the share of each co-owner. However, if it is impossible to divide in kind in kind or if the value thereof is apprehended to be significantly reduced, an auction may be conducted. In the price division, the requirement that "it shall not be divided in kind" is not physically strict interpretation, but physically strict interpretation is not to include the case where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use situation, use value after the division, etc. of the co-owner's share.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da40219, 40226 Decided September 10, 2009, etc.). The following facts or circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the respective descriptions and images of the evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 5 and the overall purport of the pleadings, namely, the Defendants did not present any opinion on the method of dividing each of the instant real estate, and ② Each of the instant real estate is adjacent to the road only to some of the instant land, and co-owners are co-owners.