1. The real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 is put to an auction and the proceeds from the auction shall be deducted;

On October 3, 1974, Defendant B purchased real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each land of this case”) with J and K, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 7, 1984 with respect to each portion of 1/3 shares.

Since November 19, 2014, K sold 1/3 shares to L on November 19, 2014, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 23, 2014.

The plaintiff was awarded the above 1/3 share of L on January 18, 2013 in the Jeju District Court M compulsory auction procedure, and accordingly the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the plaintiff was completed on January 29, 2013.

On the other hand, the J succeeded to the property of the J according to the inheritance shares listed in the inheritance shares column in the attached Form 2 attached hereto by Defendant C, D, E, E, F, G, H, and I on January 12, 1986.

[Ground for recognition] In principle, the partition of co-owned property pursuant to the relevant legal principles as to judgment on the purport of the whole pleadings and the entries in Gap evidence 1-1-5, and the purport of the whole pleadings shall be divided in kind as long as it is possible to make a reasonable partition according to the share of each co-owner. If it is impossible to divide in kind or if the value is likely to be considerably damaged due to the division, the price shall be divided through

(Article 269(2) of the Civil Act: Provided, That the requirement that "it shall not be divided in kind" in the payment shall not be physically strict interpretation, but shall include cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the property in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use situation, use value, etc. of the article jointly owned, and the use value after the division.

In full view of the following circumstances, the evidence presented before the judgment and the result of on-site verification by the court of this case, together with the overall purport of the pleadings, are deemed as follows. Since each of the land of this case cannot be divided in kind, and it is the most fair and reasonable to divide the price through an auction, and thus, the remaining amount after it is referred to an auction and deducting the auction cost from the proceeds of the auction is co-ownership of the Plaintiff and the Defendants.