beta
Text
1. The plaintiff shall sell the land listed in the separate sheet to an auction and deduct the auction cost from the price.
Reasons
Basic Facts
A. The Plaintiffs and the Defendants are co-owners sharing the land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”) in proportion to the ratio set forth in paragraph 1 of each disposition.
B. As to the instant land, there was no division agreement between the parties by the date of the closing of the instant argument, and there was no division prohibition agreement.
[Reasons for Recognition] Fact-finding, Gap evidence No. 1, and the above fact-finding of the claim for partition of co-owned property as a whole, the plaintiffs, co-owners of the land of this case, can file a claim for partition of the forest of this case with the defendants, other co-owners pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.
The method of partition of co-owned property in accordance with legal principles regarding the method of partition shall be, in principle, divided in kind as long as it is possible to make a reasonable partition according to the share of each co-owner. However, if it is impossible to divide in kind in kind or if it is apprehended that the value will be reduced remarkably, an auction may be ordered to divide in kind. In the payment division, the requirement that "it is not possible to divide in kind" is not physically strict interpretation, but it includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use situation, use value after the partition, etc. of the co-owner's share.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da40219, 40226, Sept. 10, 2009). Determination on the instant case is based on the following: (a) the Plaintiffs did not wish to divide the instant land in kind; (b) the Defendant C did not submit a specific written response to the Plaintiffs’ claims; and (c) even based on the Defendant D and E’s assertion, the instant land was divided as indicated in the provisional subdivision attached to the evidence Nos. 4 (a certificate; hereinafter “the instant certificate”) and agreed with the Plaintiffs in the division.
The possibility of such consultations or consultations is almost possible.