beta
Text
1. The remaining amount after deducting the auction expenses from the proceeds of the sale by selling the land listed in the attached list;
Reasons
1. Claim for partition of co-owned property
A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statements Nos. 1 and 2, the Plaintiff and the Appointor D share 3/20 shares in each of the 3/20 shares in the Plaintiff, and Defendant B/20 shares in each of the 2/20 shares in each of the 1/20 shares in each of the 3/20 shares in each of the 3/20 shares in each of the 1/20 shares in each of the 1/20 shares in each of the 2/20 shares in each of the 2/20 shares in each of the 2/20 shares in each of the 3
B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff may request the court to divide the instant real estate in accordance with Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.
2. Method of partition of co-owned property;
(a) If an agreement on the method of partition of the article jointly owned is not reached, co-owners may request the court for partition, and the court may order the auction of the article concerned, if it is impossible to divide it in kind or the value thereof is likely to decrease remarkably due to the partition; and
(Article 269 of the Civil Act). Co-owned property partition by judgment is, in principle, divided in kind as far as it is possible to make a reasonable partition according to the share of co-owners. However, if it is impossible to divide in kind or in kind, and if it is apprehended that the value would be significantly reduced, an auction may be ordered to divide in kind. In the payment, the requirement that "it is not possible to divide in kind" is not physically strict interpretation. It includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use situation, and use value after the division.
I would like to say.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580 delivered on April 12, 2002). However, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the written evidence Nos. 3, 4, and 5, the land of this case, the wall structure slive slive slive slives and housing units owned by Defendant B are two residential facilities and housing units.