1. The plaintiff shall sell 740 square meters prior to D in Si/Gu to an auction and the remaining amount after deducting the auction cost from the proceeds of the sale.

According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and the entire pleadings, the plaintiff and the defendants share 740 square meters (hereinafter "the real estate of this case") prior to D, Sinju-si in their respective shares of 1/3, and the plaintiff and the defendants did not reach an agreement on subdivision of the real estate of this case, and there was no agreement on subdivision prohibition.

According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant real estate, may claim the division of the said real estate against the Defendants, who are other co-owners pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

Furthermore, in full view of all circumstances acknowledged by the purport of the entire pleadings, such as the Defendants’ failure to comply with the Plaintiff’s request for partition, the submission of a written answer to the instant complaint, purport of the claim, and the cause of the claim, including the details of the request for auction partition, and the failure to appear on the date of pleading, and the registration of seizure has been completed with respect to the Defendants’ share, the instant real estate constitutes a case where it is difficult or inappropriate

Therefore, pursuant to Article 269 (2) of the Civil Code, it is reasonable to distribute the remaining amount after deducting the auction cost from the sale price by selling the real estate at an auction to the original defendant's share.

Therefore, it is decided as per Disposition by dividing the instant real estate through an auction.