1. Three percent of the amount obtained by deducting the expenses for the auction from the proceeds of sale by selling the real estate listed in the attached list to an auction;

1. The Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the real estate indicated in the separate sheet of claim and judgment (hereinafter “instant real estate”) at one-third share, and the fact that no agreement was reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendants regarding the division of the jointly owned property does not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement in the evidence Nos. 1 and 3. Thus, one of the co-owners of the instant real estate can file a claim for the division of the jointly owned property against the Defendants, who are the remaining co-owners.

Considering the following circumstances as to the method of partition of jointly owned property, the Plaintiff’s claim for auction division (division) and the Defendants’ acquisition of share ownership of the instant real estate through a compulsory auction by the court, the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not use the instant real estate as of the present time, and there is no specific use plan in the future, and the location, form, size, and circumstances leading to the registration of share ownership, etc. of the instant real estate, it is reasonable to refer the instant real estate to the auction and divide the price thereof into the auction, in view of the fact that it is difficult to divide in kind or is likely to significantly decrease its value due to the division, etc.

2. Conclusion, the real estate of this case is to be divided by payment in installments, and it is so decided as per Disposition.