logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원남원지원 2017.09.13 2016가단326
공유물분할
Text

1. Of the 24,298 square meters of land in the Jeon Chang-gun, Jeonbuk-gun, the appraisal map was successively linked to each point of the attached Table 2,3,4,5,6,7,7,8, and 2.

Reasons

1. In addition to the written evidence No. 1, the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s co-owner of 1/2 shares as to the instant forest land C, 24,298 square meters (hereinafter “instant forest”) in order to recognize the existence of the right to partition of co-owned property, and since the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not reach an agreement on the method of partition of the instant forest land between the Plaintiff and the Defendant by the date of closing argument, the Plaintiff may file a claim against the Defendant for partition of the instant forest land.

2. In light of the following circumstances: (a) method of partition of co-owned property; (b) method of partition of co-owned property; (c) method of partition of co-owned property; (d) location of the forest of this case, change of the land; and geographical characteristics and present status, such as topography, which can be known by adding the whole purport of pleadings as a result of the appraisal commission with respect to the fact that the forest of this case was owned by the Plaintiff; and (d) ownership of the Plaintiff; and (e) method of partition of the forest of this case, even if the forest of this case falls under the land as shown in the separate sheet because the forest of this case falls under the path from the beginning of the path; and (e) method of partition of co-owned property, appraisal in the forest of this case does not seem to have any imbalance in value between each land after the partition due to the existence of entry roads; and (e) method of partition of co-owned property in this case, it is reasonable to determine that the portion of the land of this case is owned by the Plaintiff in sequence 12,14, in sequence 14.

3. In conclusion, we decide to divide the forest of this case into the forest of this case as above and decide as per Disposition.

arrow