logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.11.21 2019가단113307
공유물분할
Text

1. The amount remaining after deducting the expenses for the auction from the proceeds of the sale by selling each real estate listed in the separate sheet 1;

Reasons

Facts of recognition

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants share each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) in the same share ratio as that indicated in the separate sheet No. 2 co-ownership calculation sheet.

[Plaintiffs shall be the same person as Australia B who is a right holder of 1/3 of the real estate listed in the attached Table 6 list].

The agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the method of dividing the instant real estate has not been concluded until the closing date of argument.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Gap evidence No. 10-1 and 2, determination of the purport of whole pleadings

A. According to the above facts of recognition, as long as the agreement on the method of dividing the real estate of this case has not been reached, the plaintiff may request the division of the real estate of this case.

B. Furthermore, as to the method of partition, when the partition of co-owned property is unable to be divided in kind or in kind, or when the value thereof is likely to be reduced remarkably if the partition is made in kind, the court may order the auction of the co-owned property to pay in kind (Article 269(2) of the Civil Act). The case where it is impossible to divide in kind includes the case where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind in light of the nature, location, area, utilization situation of the co-owned property, use value after the partition, etc.

I would like to say.

C. In full view of the circumstances, including the fact that the Plaintiff sought an auction division for each of the instant real estate, the Defendant D did not dispute the auction division, and the Defendant C also sought to divide the instant land by a method other than auction, it is inappropriate for the Plaintiff and the Defendants to use the method of distributing the remaining money after deducting the auction cost from the auction price by selling each of the instant real estate at auction.

Conclusion

A. It shall sell the instant real estate to an auction and distribute the proceeds in the same manner as that stated in Paragraph 1 of the Disposition.

(b).

arrow