1. The answer 1,564 square meters in Gangseo-si, Gangnam-si shall be in sequence 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 17, 18, 19, 19, and 1 of the annexed drawings.

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the entry of evidence No. 1, as to the claim for partition of co-owned property, the fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendant shared 1/2 shares each of 1/2 shares, and the fact that no agreement was reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendant regarding the method of partition of the instant real estate.

The defendant asserts that there was an agreement between D and the defendant as the former co-owner of the real estate of this case on sectional ownership, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

The plaintiff has a co-owned property partition right against the defendant as to the real estate in this case.

2. In full view of the evidence evidence Nos. 2 and 6 of the partition method and the result of the examination by this court, there is no road access to the real estate of this case, and it appears that there is no difference in the land value due to the location of the appraiser E. In accordance with the result of the survey appraisal, it is reasonable to divide this part into the Plaintiff and 782 square meters in proportion to “1” portion on the line, “1” (hereinafter referred to as “the part “1”), “17, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 in order of “2” portion on the line (hereinafter referred to as “the part”) according to the result of the survey appraisal.

3. Conclusion: (a) The instant real estate owned by the Plaintiff; and (b) the instant real estate owned by the Defendant.