1. The real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 shall be put to an auction and the proceeds of the auction shall be deducted from the proceeds of the auction;

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs and the Defendants shared each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) according to the co-ownership share ratio listed in the separate sheet No. 2.

B. The Plaintiffs and the Defendants did not agree on the division of each of the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] Defendant G, J, K, L, M, and AG: The absence of dispute, each entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the remainder of the purport of the entire pleadings against the Defendants: deemed confession under Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Co-owners of the immovables which have created the right to partition of co-owned property may claim partition of the co-owned property, and if the agreement on the method of partition has not been reached, the court may request partition; and

(Article 268(1) main text and Article 269 of the Civil Act). As seen earlier, the Plaintiffs, co-owners of each of the instant real estate, and the Defendants, did not reach an agreement on the division of each of the instant real estate. Therefore, the Plaintiffs may file a claim with the court for the division against the Defendants, who are other co-owners, unless there are special circumstances.

3. Method of partition of co-owned property;

A. The method of partition of co-owned property in accordance with the relevant legal principles is, in principle, to divide it in kind with the one in which a reasonable partition can be made according to the co-owner's share, or if it is impossible to divide it in kind in kind or if it is likely that the value might be reduced remarkably if it is difficult to divide it in kind, an auction may be ordered to divide

The requirement of “undivided in kind” is not 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 use value after the division.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da40219, 40226 Decided September 10, 2009, etc.) B.

Judgment

In light of the above legal principles, the foregoing case is a health unit.