1. The remainder of 150.9m2, Hongsung-gun E, Hongsung-gun, put to an auction and deduct the auction expenses from the proceeds thereof.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a 4/6 equity right holder among the 150.9m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) of Hongsung-gun, Hongnam-gun E, and the Defendants are one-six equity right holder, respectively.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the division of the instant land.

【Ground of recognition】 Each entry of evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. As seen above, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant land, and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the method of partition. Therefore, the Plaintiff, a co-owner, may file a claim for judicial partition against the Defendants, who are other co-owners.

B. Furthermore, we examine the method of division.

(1) In principle, partition of co-owned property by judgment shall be made in kind as long as a reasonable partition can be made according to each co-owner's share. However, even if it is impossible or possible in kind, if the price might be reduced remarkably due to the auction of the co-owned property, it shall be made by the so-called "sale of price" method to divide the price by ordering the auction of the co-owned property.

The requirement that a "in-kind can not be divided" in the price division is not a physically strict interpretation, but it includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the property in kind in light of the nature, location, area, utilization status, use value after the division, etc. of the common property.

Although it is formally possible to divide in kind.

Even if the common property cannot be divided equally according to the ratio of shares owned by each co-owner in consideration of the location, area and surrounding road conditions, use value, price, ratio of shares owned by each co-owner, and current status of use and profit-making, etc., the common property shall not be divided in kind, but the common property shall be divided in a price-sharing method.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 92Da30603 delivered on January 19, 1993; 2002Da4580 delivered on April 12, 2002, etc.). (2)