1. Defendant C’s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by Defendant C.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as follows, except for the following additional statements concerning the matters asserted by Defendant C in the trial, and therefore, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Defendant C asserts to the effect that the judgment of the court of first instance ordering the in-kind division on the basis of the result of the survey and appraisal conducted by the appraiser K of the first instance trial where the instant land was divided in kind on the basis of the result of the survey and appraisal conducted by the appraiser K of the first instance trial, despite the occurrence of a reasonable price difference between the Plaintiff and the Defendants’ respective land allocated, and thus, it was erroneous

The following circumstances acknowledged through the records, i.e., the first instance court conducted on-site verification of the location and use of the land of this case in the presence of the plaintiff and the defendant with respect to the land of this case. In particular, the defendant C's attorney stated in the above on-site verification that "in order for the defendants to jointly own the area where the shipbuilding graves are installed." The first instance court made a partition of co-owned property in accordance with all the circumstances, including the substantive interests and demands of these parties, and even according to the fact-finding results, it is difficult to see that the price difference between the plaintiff and the defendants of the land divided is difficult. Even if the price difference occurred, it appears to be within the extent acceptable. Furthermore, the land of this case was purchased for the purpose of installing graves for the defendants' pre-sale of the defendants, as desired, the defendants' co-ownership of the land belongs to the defendants' co-ownership of the above divided method.