1. The remaining money after deducting the expenses for the auction from the proceeds of the sale by selling the real estate listed in the attached list;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant are co-owners who own 1/2 shares of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

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

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

2. The Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant real estate, may claim a partition of the instant real estate against the Defendant, who is another co-owner.

However, the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not reach a separate agreement by the method of spot-sale, and even in the case of spot-sale, the Plaintiff and the Defendant expressed their opinions that there is no particular method other than the method of selling the instant real estate to auction and dividing the proceeds of sale, so this constitutes a case where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the instant real estate in kind.

Therefore, the method of distributing the remaining money in proportion to the shares of the plaintiff and the defendant, which was sold to auction the real estate of this case after deducting the auction cost from the sale price, shall be fair and reasonable.

3. Conclusion, the claim of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.