1. The real estate indicated in the annexed real estate shall be put to an auction and the auction expenses shall be deducted from the proceeds of sale;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff A and the Defendant C, D, and the Network J (hereinafter “the deceased”) are co-owners on the register of each real estate listed in the No. 1 and 3 of the attached real estate indications No. 1 and 3. The Plaintiff, the Defendant C, D, and the Deceased are co-owners on the register of real estate listed in the No. 2 of the attached real estate indications No. 1 and No. 2 of the attached real estate.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant real estate”) each real estate indicated in the separate sheet. B

Defendant D, E, F, G, H, and I inherited the deceased’s inherited property. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs and the Defendants own the instant real property in proportion to their respective shares indicated in the separate shares.

C. Although the Plaintiffs and the Defendants did not agree not to divide the instant real estate, they did not reach an agreement regarding the method of division.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1-1-3, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the facts found above, since the plaintiffs and the defendants, who are co-owners of the real estate of this case, did not reach agreement on the method of partition, the plaintiffs can file a judicial claim against the defendants for partition pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. According to the evidence No. 1-1-3 of the partition method Gap, since multiple registrations of provisional seizure and provisional disposition have been completed on the real estate of this case, it is reasonable to divide the real estate of this case in kind in light of its nature, location and size, utilization situation, use value after the division, etc., and if it is inappropriate to divide the real estate of this case in kind or if it is divided in kind in kind, its value will be significantly reduced.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580 delivered on April 12, 2002). Therefore, it is reasonable to divide the instant real estate by means of a method of payment by auction under Article 269(2) of the Civil Act.

3. Conclusion, the real estate of this case is sold at auction.