1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Of the area of 274m2 in Gwangju Mine-gu, Annex 1, 4, 5, 6.

1. Basic facts

A. The instant land was owned by the Plaintiff at 165/274, the network E/ 83/274, and Defendant C’s 26/274 shares. On August 21, 1990, the network E inherited the Plaintiff’s shares at 1/7% of the network E’s respective shares.

B. The Plaintiff, Defendant C, Defendant, etc. did not reach an agreement on the division of the instant land.

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

2. Determination

A. According to the factual relations as seen earlier prior to the creation of the right to partition of co-owned property, the Plaintiff may file a claim against the Defendant C, Defendant (Appointed Party), etc. for partition of the said land, since the co-owners of the instant land failed to reach an agreement on the partition

B. Division of the method of partition of the article jointly owned by one owner may be selected at will if the co-owners reach an agreement, but if the article jointly owned is divided by a trial due to the failure to reach an agreement, in principle, the court shall divide it in kind. The auction of the article can be ordered only when the value of the article is likely to be significantly reduced if it is unable to divide it in kind or if it is divided in kind. Thus, barring the above circumstances, the court shall render a judgment that divides the article jointly owned into several articles in kind and recognizes the sole ownership of each co-owner for the article divided into two articles according to the ratio of shares of co-owner.

In addition, the method of division is not the way requested by the parties, but it would make a reasonable division according to the ratio of shares of co-owners according to the overall circumstances of the property which is the co-ownership relation or the object at the discretion of the court.