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

1. Evidence A through A4 and the purport of the whole pleadings, which have been recognized;

A. As to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff shared 328/660 shares, 2/660 shares, 165/60 shares, 165/60 shares, and 165/660 shares by the Appointed C.

B. The Plaintiff’s successor and the Defendant and the designated parties did not have an agreement prohibiting the division of the instant real estate, but did not reach an agreement on the method of division of the instant real estate.

C. The instant real estate is not permitted under the Act and subordinate statutes regarding urban development and by law to catch shares in a housing site developed.

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff’s successor, co-owner of the instant real estate, may claim the division of the instant real estate jointly owned pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act against the Defendant and the designated parties, who are other co-owners.

As to the method of partition of co-owned property, in principle, it is possible to divide the co-owned property in kind with the one in which a reasonable partition can be made according to the share of each co-owner. If it is impossible to divide in kind or in kind with the one in which the value may be reduced remarkably, the auction of the goods may be ordered (Article 269 of the Civil Act). The requirement that "it may not be divided in kind" in the price division is not physically strict interpretation, but physically strict interpretation is not to include cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use situation of the co-owned property, use value after the division, etc.

In addition, the value of the portion to be owned independently by the in-kind division will be significantly reduced compared to the value of the share before the division, even if the co-owner's share is a co-owner.