1. The plaintiff and the plaintiff shall sell the real estate listed in the annex 1 to an auction and deduct the auction cost from the proceeds of the auction.

1. The Plaintiff and the Defendants possess the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) at the corresponding share ratio listed in the attached Table 2.

There was no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the method of dividing the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] The written evidence Nos. 1 and 2 of this Court, the division of this Court, the P community service center, QMyeon Office, and the result of fact inquiry into the group, the purport of the whole argument, and the purport of the whole argument

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts acknowledged, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the land of this case, may file a claim for partition against the Defendants, who are other co-owners, pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. In the case of dividing the jointly-owned property through a judgment on the method of partition of co-owned property, if it is impossible to divide it in kind or if it is apprehended to substantially decrease the value thereof, the auction of the property may be ordered to divide it in kind. Here, the requirement of "shall not be divided in kind" is not physically strict interpretation, but physically strict interpretation is not to include the case where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide it in kind in light of the nature, location, size, situation of use and use value after the division.

The phrase "if the value of the portion is likely to be reduced significantly if it is divided in kind" includes the case where, even if a co-owner is a person, the value of the portion to be owned by him/her is likely to be reduced significantly than the value of the share before the division.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da40219, 40226 Decided September 10, 2009). In light of the above evidence and the overall purport of the pleadings, the following factors are considered: (a) the nature, location, area, and utilization status of the jointly-owned property, the use value after the division, and the registration status in the cadastral record of the pertinent land, etc., where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the pertinent property in kind.