1. It shall be put up for auction the area of 227 square meters prior to I at the time of Jinjin-si, and the remainder after deducting the auction cost from the price shall be attached.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff (the captain), the Appointer J, and the Defendants are co-owners who own co-ownership shares indicated in the respective shares column in attached Tables 1 and 2 of the co-ownership shares of the attached Table 1 and 2 with respect to the land of 227 square meters and 1232 square meters in K in Jin-si (hereinafter “each land of this case”).

B. Until the date of the closing of argument in the instant case, there was no agreement on the method of dividing each of the instant land between the Plaintiff (the captain), the Appointed J and the Defendants.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry into the facts without dispute, Gap 1 and 2 (including additional numbers)

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts acknowledged, the plaintiffs, co-owners of each of the lands of this case (including the appointed parties J, and expressed the plaintiffs as co-owners) may file a claim against the defendants, other co-owners, for the partition of each of the lands of this case under Articles 268 and 269 of the Civil Act.

B. (1) In the case of dividing the co-owned property through a trial, if it is impossible to divide it in kind or if it is possible to divide it in kind with the money, the auction of the article may be ordered, and "the price may not be divided in kind" shall not be physically strict interpretation, but it shall include the case where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide it in kind in light of the nature, location, size, utilization status, use value after the division, etc. of the co-owned property in light of the nature, location, and use value after the division.

The phrase "if the value of the portion is likely to be reduced significantly if it is divided in kind" includes the case where, even if a co-owner is a person, the value of the portion to be owned by him/her is likely to be reduced significantly than the value of the share before the division.

(2) The following circumstances, i.e., the land of this case, which is deemed to have been owned by the entire purport of the pleadings, based on the entire purport of the arguments as seen earlier, are comprehensively considered. (2) The following circumstances, namely, ① the land of this case, is owned by the previous land.