1. The amount remaining after deducting the auction expenses from the proceeds of the sale of the real estate listed in the annex 1 list;

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence No. 1 and evidence No. 2, the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) with co-ownership share indicated in the separate sheet No. 2, and the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the method of partition of the instant land, which is public property by the closing date of arguments in the instant case. Thus, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant land, may file a claim against the Defendants, other co-owners, for land partition pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil

2. Method of partition of co-owned property;

A. Generally, the division of an article jointly owned by a trial is in principle made in kind as long as it is possible to make a reasonable division according to the share of each co-owner. However, if it is impossible to divide the article in kind in kind or it is anticipated that the value of the article might decrease substantially if the division in kind might decrease substantially, an auction may be held. Here, the phrase "in the case of a unable to be divided in kind" includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the article in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use status, use value after the division, etc. of the article in question, not physically strict interpretation. It includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the article in kind, and it includes cases where the value of the article to be owned independently by the co-owner might decrease substantially compared with the share value before the division.

(See Supreme Court Decision 91Da27228 delivered on November 12, 1991, and Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580 delivered on April 12, 2002, etc.) B.

Based on the above legal principles, the following can be seen in full view of each of the statements in the health room, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 5 as to the method of dividing the land of this case.