1. The amount remaining after the amount of 3,306 square meters of H forest in the Dong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Y is put to an auction and the auction cost is deducted from the price.

1. Co-owned property partition claim

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Plaintiffs and the Defendants are 3,306 square meters of H forests and fields in the Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu (hereinafter “instant land”).

(2) The Plaintiffs and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on subdivision of the instant land, and there is no agreement on subdivision prohibition as to the instant land.

【Ground of recognition】 Each entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiffs, co-owners of the land of this case, may file a claim for the partition of the land of this case with the Defendants, who are other co-owners, pursuant to the main sentence of Article 268(1) and Article 269(1)

2. Method of partition of co-owned property;

(a) In the case of dividing the article jointly owned by a trial, in principle, by dividing it in kind, or by dividing it in kind or by dividing it in kind, if the value thereof is apprehended to be significantly reduced, the auction of the article jointly owned may be ordered, and the price may be paid in installments;

Here, the requirement of "undivided in kind" includes cases where it is physically impossible to divide the article in kind, as well as cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the article in kind in light of the nature, location, area, current use, value of use after the division.

In addition, the phrase “where the value of the division is likely to be significantly reduced if it is divided in kind” includes cases where, even if a co-owner is a person, the value of the portion to be owned by himself/herself is likely to be significantly reduced compared to the value of the share before the division (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da56297, Dec. 10, 2015).

In light of the location, area, utilization status, and the use value of the land of this case as follows, which can be seen by comprehensively considering all the evidence and materials submitted in this case as stated in Gap evidence Nos. 3 and Eul evidence No. 2, this case is viewed as follows.