1. The remainder of each real estate listed in the separate sheet after deducting the cost of the auction from the proceeds of the auction;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) at the ratio indicated in the separate sheet of co-ownership.

B. The Plaintiff proposed the Defendants to divide each of the instant real estate, but did not reach an agreement on the method of division.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 5 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff, the co-owner of each real estate of this case, and the Defendants, did not reach agreement on the method of partition. Thus, the Plaintiff has the right to partition co-owned property as to the forest of this case against the Defendants based on his co-ownership right.

B. As a matter of principle, the partition of co-owned property shall be made by the method of in-kind division as long as it is possible to make a reasonable partition according to the share of each co-owner. However, even if it is impossible or possible in-kind form, if the price is likely to decrease substantially, the method of in-kind division shall be made by ordering the auction of the co-owned property to divide the price. In payment division, the requirement does not physically strict interpretation, but includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the property in-kind in light of the nature of the co-owned property, location, area, use, and the use value after the division. 2) In the case of each real estate of this case, the number of co-owners is large compared to the fact that the area of each co-owner is not more than 113 square meters or 198 square meters, and it is impossible to divide a part of the real estate into not more than 2,000 square meters.

The plaintiff is seeking to pay the price according to the auction, but most of the defendant does not present any opinion.

Defendant E is seeking a price compensation, but the plaintiff seems to have no intention to respond to it, and even if the above defendant's shares are compensated for.