1. Of the 8,969 square meters of D forest land in Nam-si, Namyang-si, each point of the attached Table 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,7,8,9,10, and 1 shall be in order.

1. In fact, the Plaintiff and the Defendants shared 1/3 shares of each of the instant land in Namyang-si D Forest land 8,969 square meters (hereinafter “the instant land”).

As of the closing date of the instant case, no agreement was reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the division method of the instant land.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts established prior to the occurrence of the right to partition of co-owned property, the Plaintiff may claim a partition against the Defendants at any time pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act as to the land of this case, and thus, it is deemed that the Plaintiff has

B. Division of the method of partition of co-owned property is in principle divided in kind by the court in the case where the co-owners voluntarily choose the method, but if the co-owned property is divided by the judgment because the agreement is not reached.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da10183 Decided July 22, 2004, etc.). In light of the following, it is reasonable to divide the land of this case as stated in Paragraph (1) of this Article into two parts: (a) 12 of evidence No. 3; (b) the result of the measurement and appraisal of the Korea Land Information Corporation; and (c) the entire purport of the pleading and the form, location, area, etc. of the land of this case, which can be known by comprehensively taking into account

In other words, among the land in this case, the portion 5,980 square meters in the "A" portion of the attached Table 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 100 square meters connected in order to each point of the attached Table 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 100 square meters are jointly owned by the Defendants, and the appraisal in the attached Table 6, 7, 13, 12, 11, and 6 shall be divided in proportion to the shares of the Plaintiff and the Defendants from the economic value in light of the form and size of the land, etc.

3. Conclusion as above.