1. The Plaintiff, the Plaintiff, and the remainder of the amount calculated by deducting the auction cost from the proceeds by selling 9,626m2 to G forest land at Kimcheon-si.

1. Basic facts

A. H, I, and Defendant C owned 1/3 shares of each of 9,626 square meters of G forest land in Kimcheon-si (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. Auction of I’s one-third portion of the instant land was initiated and sold to J on October 18, 2006, and the Plaintiff purchased the said one-third share from J on November 30, 2009, and completed the transfer registration on December 8, 2009.

C. H died on January 24, 2007, and currently its heir is Defendant B, Defendant D, E, and F.

Until the closing date of the instant case, the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the method of dividing the instant land was not reached.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 and 6 evidence (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts acknowledged above, since the agreement on the method of partition between the plaintiff and the defendants, who are co-owners of the land of this case, was not constituted, the plaintiff is entitled to file a partition claim against the defendants as co-owners of the land of this case.

3. Division of the method of partition of co-owned property may be decided at will if the co-owners reach an agreement, but if the co-owners divide the co-owned property through a trial because they did not reach an agreement, the court shall divide it in kind in principle. The court may issue an order for auction of the goods only when it is impossible to divide it in kind or when the value of the property is likely to decrease substantially if it is divided in kind. Thus, barring such circumstances, the court shall render a judgment that recognizes the sole ownership of each co-owner for the divided property by dividing the jointly-owned property into several goods in kind in proportion to the shares of each co-owner, and the method of division shall be co-ownership at the discretion of the court, rather than by the method requested by the parties.