(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2020.07.02 2019가단115811

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2020.07.02 2019가단115811

공유물분할

Text

1. The remaining amount after deducting the expenses for the auction from the proceeds of the sale by selling the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

Reasons

1. Co-owned property partition claim

A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiff and the defendants shared the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter "the real estate of this case") at the ratio of shares as indicated in the following table, the plaintiff and the defendants did not reach an agreement on partition of the real estate of this case, and the agreement on prohibition of partition of the real estate of this case does not exist.

Defendant A 1/8 of his/her own shares

1. The defendant B/8;

2. The defendant 4/30;

3. D 1/8;

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant real estate, may request the Defendants, other co-owners, to divide the instant real estate pursuant to the main sentence of Article 268(1) and Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

2. Method of partition of co-owned property;

A. The partition of co-owned property based on a trial shall be, in principle, divided in kind to the extent that a reasonable partition can be made according to the share of each co-owner. If it is impossible to divide in kind or the value thereof might be substantially damaged due to the division, the proceeds thereof shall be divided through an auction.

(Article 269, Section 2 of the Civil Act).

In full view of the location, area, utilization status, use value, share ratio of co-owners, etc. of the real estate in this case, which can be known according to the purport of the entire pleadings, it is not easy to divide the real estate in kind so that it can be distributed in a fair manner, and even if divided, the value of use as a whole may be considerably damaged. Considering the fact that the Plaintiff, Defendant C, and D want to divide the real estate in kind, and Defendant B does not present any special opinion on the method of division, it is reasonable to divide the real estate in this case by means of the auction.

3. In conclusion, the real estate of this case is put to an auction and the auction cost is deducted from the price.

참조조문

-민법 제268조 제1항

-민법 제269조 제1항

-민법 제269조 제2항

유사 판례

-대전지방법원천안지원 2019.04.24 2018가단10834

-수원지방법원 2016.01.20 2014가단536963

-서울서부지방법원 2017.06.01 2017가단200842

-제주지방법원 2018.02.02 2016가단4036

-대구지방법원 경주지원 2017.04.25 2016가단5903