The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Daejeon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The co-ownership of an article is divided into one form of co-ownership of the article and belongs to many persons. As such, each co-owner has the right to abolish the existing co-ownership by unilaterally filing a claim for partition of the article jointly owned and to realize a legal relationship for distributing the article jointly owned among the co-owners, except in extenuating circumstances;

Furthermore, in the method of division, if there is an agreement between the parties on the method of division, the parties may arbitrarily choose the method, but in the case of dividing the jointly-owned property by the judgment due to the failure to reach an agreement, the court shall, in principle, divide it in kind, and in the case of dividing it in kind, if it is impossible to divide it in kind or it is possible to order the auction of the goods only when the value of it is likely to be significantly reduced if it is divided in kind. Thus, barring any such circumstance, the court shall divide the jointly-owned property into several goods in kind according to the ratio of shares of

Meanwhile, as a lawsuit for the partition of co-owned property, the court may order the partition of co-owned property in a reasonable manner at its own discretion without being able to seek by the plaintiff, and in the case of the partition of co-owned property in kind, it is allowed to divide the co-owned property within the share limit of the co-owner and to allow the remaining co-owners who do not want the partition to remain in common. However, even so, within the share limit of co-owner who requested the partition of co-owned property, the co-owned property should be resolved by selling in kind or by auction or division, and the sole ownership should be recognized. The court shall order the partition of co-owned property only for the part of the share of the co-owned