beta
Text
1.(a)
Attached Form 3. The auction of real estate listed in the attached list 1 and the remaining money after deducting the auction cost from the price.
Reasons
1. In the facts of recognition, the plaintiffs and the defendants shared the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter "real estate No. 1 of this case") in proportion to the co-ownership shares listed in the separate sheet No. 3, and shared the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2 of this case (hereinafter "real estate No. 2 of this case") in proportion to the co-ownership shares listed in the separate sheet No. 4. The facts that the real estate No. 1 and No. 2 of this case were each housing or its site, and the fact that the agreement between the plaintiffs and the defendants regarding the method of partition of each of the above real estate has not been
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. According to the facts of recognition under paragraph (1), the Plaintiffs may claim against the Defendants the partition of the instant 1 and 2 real estate jointly owned.
B. Furthermore, we examine the method of division.
In principle, division of co-owned property by judgment shall not be divided in kind as long as it is possible to make a reasonable division according to the share of each co-owner. However, the requirement is not physically strict interpretation, but it shall include cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind in light of the nature, location, size, utilization situation of the co-owned property, use value after the division, etc.
(2) In the case of a co-owner's in-kind, "if the value of the property is likely to be reduced significantly if the property is divided in kind" also includes the case where the value of the property to be owned by the sole owner is likely to be reduced significantly than the value of the property before the division.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580 delivered on April 12, 2002). In light of the fact that real estate Nos. 1 and 2 of this case is each house or its site, it is difficult or inappropriate to divide each of the above real estate in kind according to the shares of the plaintiffs and the defendants, and if it is made to divide it in kind, it is difficult or inappropriate to divide it in kind according to the shares