1. A ship which connects each point of 2, 5, 6, 7, and 2 of the annexed drawings and the annexed drawings to the Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan City MT land in sequence.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants owned a share of 3342 square meters in the Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan City MT land (hereinafter “instant land”) in proportion to the co-ownership shares in the attached Form.

B. There is no partition prohibition agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants, and there was no agreement on the partition method of the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts acknowledged, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the land of this case, may claim the partition of the land of this case against the Defendants, who are other co-owners, pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

3. As a lawsuit seeking partition of co-owned property, the court may order partition in a reasonable manner at its discretion without having difficulty to seek the plaintiff from the partition of co-owned property. If multiple persons divide the co-owned property in kind in the limit of share of the party demanding partition, the remaining co-owners who do not want the partition are allowed to have the co-owned property left jointly (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da8888, Jul. 23, 2015). In addition, in the case of partitioning land, in principle, the size of land acquired by each co-owner should be equal to the proportion of the co-owned share. However, it does not necessarily mean that the form or location of the land, the situation of its use, or the economic value is not equal, if the economic value is not equal, it shall be allowed to divide it in proportion to the share ratio (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 93Da27819, Dec. 7, 1993).