1. The plaintiffs are the plaintiffs with the remainder of 1,217 square meters AC large 1,217 square meters, which are put to an auction and the auction cost is deducted from the price.

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 20, the plaintiffs and the defendants jointly inherit on June 10, 1971 as the descendants of the deceased AD and share of 1,217 square meters (hereinafter "the land in this case") in the separate sheet for each share in the separate sheet (the fact that the deceased on December 2, 2015, the deceased on December 2, 2015, and the heir of the deceased on which the deceased on December 2, 2015, the heir of the deceased on the part of Y, Z, AA, and AB succeeded to the proceedings in this case). As to the method of dividing the land in this case, it can be acknowledged that there was no agreement between the plaintiffs and the defendants on the method of dividing the land in this case.

Co-owners of real estate may claim a partition of co-owned property against other co-owners at any time (Article 268(1) of the Civil Act). As seen above, the Plaintiffs and the Defendants did not reach agreement on the method of partition of the land of this case, which is jointly owned by them. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Plaintiffs, co-owners of the land of this case, may claim a partition against

In addition, in the case of dividing the article jointly owned by the trial, it is a principle of dividing it in kind, or if it is impossible to divide it in kind or if it is possible to divide it in kind in kind, the value may be reduced remarkably, the auction of the article jointly owned can be ordered.

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

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Da56297 Decided December 10, 2015). The following circumstances acknowledged based on the facts acknowledged earlier and the evidence cited earlier, namely, the Plaintiffs and the Defendants were jointly inherited and shared the instant land as persons with a relationship of relatives with the fourth or fifth degree of relationship.