1. As to the share of co-ownership in attached Form 2 among each real estate listed in attached Form 1 from the Plaintiffs.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 5, 2017, the Defendants and the NetworkJ jointly owned each of the instant real estate listed in the separate sheet 1 (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”), and as the deceased on August 5, 2017, succeeded to the lostJ shares by the Plaintiffs.

As a result, the plaintiffs and the Defendants owned each of the instant real estate in accordance with the ratio of co-ownership shares listed in attached Table 2.

B. On June 7, 2017, K Co., Ltd. created the right to collateral security of KRW 600 million with the maximum debt amount on each of the instant real estate, and L Co., Ltd. also created the right to collateral security of KRW 250 million with the maximum debt amount on June 20, 2017, and M Co., Ltd, on July 5, 2017, respectively, for the aforementioned purpose, the right to collateral security of KRW 218 million with the maximum debt amount on July 5, 2017.

(hereinafter “each of the instant mortgages”) C.

There is no separate agreement between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants on the prohibition of partition regarding each of the instant real estate, and no agreement on the method of partition has been reached so far.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul evidence Nos. 1-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Since the plaintiffs and the defendants, who are co-owners of each real estate of this case, did not reach agreement on the method of dividing common properties, they shall sell them at auction and distribute the proceeds of sale at the ratio of co-ownership.

B. Defendant I’s assertion of the Defendants should be divided in kind by compensating for the Plaintiffs’ share ownership of each of the instant real estate at the value and acquiring it.

3. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiffs and the defendants share each of the real estate of this case in the proportion of co-ownership shares listed in the separate sheet No. 2. The plaintiffs and the defendants did not reach an agreement on the method of partition of each of the real estate of this case.