(영문) 대구지방법원영덕지원 2017.04.04 2016가단1415

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원영덕지원 2017.04.04 2016가단1415

공유물분할

Text

1. The amount of real estate listed in the separate sheet remaining after the cost of auction is deducted from the proceeds of auction;

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) in proportion to Plaintiff 3/7 and 2/7 of the Defendants, respectively.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the method of dividing the instant real estate until the closing date of the instant argument.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts acknowledged as above, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant real estate, may file a claim for partition of the instant real estate with the Defendants, other co-owners, pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. Division of the method of partition of co-owned property can be decided at will if the co-owners reach an agreement, but if the co-owners divide the co-owned property through a trial due to the failure to reach agreement, the court shall divide it in kind in principle. If it is impossible to divide it in kind or if it is possible to divide it in kind in kind, the price can be reduced remarkably. The auction of the property can be ordered only when the value might be reduced remarkably.

As seen earlier, it is unclear whether it is possible to divide the real estate in kind by the method alleged by the Plaintiff, considering the minimum division area of the real estate located in Yeongdeungpo-gun, the size of the real estate in this case, the building-to-land ratio set forth in the construction-related Acts and subordinate statutes, the minimum separation distance from adjoining land, and the value of the real estate in this case, which can be known by comprehensively considering the results of the fact-finding on the Young-gun of this Court, as seen earlier, that the consultation on the method of dividing the real estate in this case between the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not lead to an agreement on the method of dividing the real estate in this case, and even if possible,

Therefore, the instant real estate is divided between the Plaintiff and the Defendants in kind.

참조조문

-민법 제269조 제1항

유사 판례

-대구지방법원영덕지원 2017.09.05 2017가단662

-대구지방법원영덕지원 2017.07.18 2016가단1422

-대구지방법원 영덕지원 2018.04.10 2017가단10911

-대전지방법원서산지원 2016.01.13 2015가단1835

-대구지방법원영덕지원 2017.12.19 2017가단1221