1. The remaining amount of 4,612 square meters prior to Pyeongtaek-gun, Gangwon-do shall be placed at an auction and the auction expenses shall be deducted from the price.

1. The occurrence of a claim for partition of the article jointly owned;

A. Fact 1) The land indicated in Paragraph 1 of the Disposition (hereinafter “instant land”).

As to the Plaintiff’s title A’s 4541/4612 shares, each ownership transfer registration of the Defendant’s name 71/4612 shares, and the land listed in Section 2 of the Disposition (hereinafter “instant land”).

As to Plaintiff B, the registration of transfer of shares was completed in the name of Defendant B, and each ownership transfer of Plaintiff B’s shares in the name of Defendant No. 117/4731. 2) F completed the registration of transfer of shares on April 1, 2008 as to the entire Plaintiff B’s shares in the instant land No. 2 as the receipt No. 7739 on April 2, 2008.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above findings of the determination, the Plaintiffs, co-owners of the No. 1 and 2 of the instant case, are entitled to file a claim against the Defendant, who is another co-owner, for the partition of the said land jointly owned pursuant to Article 269(1)

2. The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted prior to the division of common property and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, ① the area to be acquired by the Defendant after the division, if the land Nos. 1 and 2 is divided in kind according to the shares of the Plaintiffs and the Defendant, appears to have less economic utility for the Defendant. ② The land Nos. 1 and 2 of this case and the land Nos. 1 and 2 of Gangwon-do, which are owned by the Defendant, are all blind, and the Defendant proposed a spot-sale plan by asserting that he acquired shares of the land No. 1 and 2 of this case for the purpose of building a road to adjoin the above G land with a contribution. However, the Plaintiffs are opposed to the above division on the ground that the above division was unilaterally favorable to the Defendant. ③ The registration of provisional disposition regarding the shares of the Plaintiff No. 2 of the land No. 2 of this case is completed, so the legal relationship may be complicated if