The plaintiff and defendant D have the remainder of the amount calculated by deducting the auction cost from the price by selling 9m2 to the auction in Kim Sea-si, Kim Jong-si.

The Plaintiff and Defendant D shared 2/10 shares, Defendant B and C shared 3/10 shares, respectively, and the fact that consultation on the method of dividing the real estate in this case between the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not lead to any dispute between the parties, or that agreement on the method of dividing the real estate in this case was not reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendants, can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings as stated in the evidence No. 1.

According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff is a co-owner of the instant real estate, and pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act, the Plaintiff may seek co-owned property partition against the Defendants, other co-owners.

2. Method of partition of the article jointly owned;

A. According to the judgment, in principle, the article jointly owned is divided in kind. However, if it is impossible to divide in kind or it is possible to divide in kind the article in kind, the value thereof may be reduced remarkably, the auction of the article jointly owned may be ordered.

The requirement of "shall not be divided in kind" 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, and the use value after the division.

The phrase “where the value of the division is likely to be reduced remarkably 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 him/her is likely to be significantly reduced compared to the share value before the division (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580, Apr. 12, 2002).

In full view of the following circumstances, Gap's evidence Nos. 3 and 4, and the purpose of the entire pleadings, since the real estate of this case is unable to be divided in kind or it is likely that its value will be significantly reduced if it is divided in kind, the real estate of this case shall be sold to each auction and the auction costs shall be incurred from the proceeds thereof.