1. The money remaining after selling at an auction of 2863m2 in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seoul, after deducting the auction cost from the selling price.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. As of the date of the closing of argument in the instant case, the Plaintiff and the Defendants shared at the following rates: (a) 2863 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) prior to K in Seocho-gu Seoul as of the date of the closing of argument in

In other words, the Plaintiff 495/2871, Defendant B was 693/2871, Defendant C was 147/2871, Defendant D was 495/2871, Defendant E was 495/2871, Defendant F was 66/2871, Defendant G was 44/2871, Defendant H was 44/2871, Defendant H was 44/2871, Defendant A was 44/2871, Defendant J was 34/2871, and Defendant J was 348/2871.

B. The Plaintiff proposed the Defendants to divide the instant land, but did not reach an agreement on the method of partition until the date of closing the argument in the instant case.

C. The instant land constitutes a green area under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “Act”) and the Enforcement Decree thereof.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the above acknowledged facts, the plaintiff and the defendants, co-owner of the land of this case, did not reach agreement on the method of partition. Thus, the plaintiff has the right to partition as to the real estate of this case against the defendants on the basis of their co-ownership right.

(b) Division of co-owned property by one trial on the method of partition shall, in principle, be made in kind so far as it is possible to make a rational partition according to the shares of each co-owner, but if it is impossible to divide in kind or it is possible to do so, if there is a possibility that the value will be reduced remarkably as a result thereof, it shall be made by ordering the auction of the co-owned property

Here, the requirement that the “in-kind cannot be divided” is not a physically strict interpretation, but includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the property in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use status, and the use value after the division.

“in kind.”