1. The amount remaining after selling D Forest land 1023 square meters at auction at Silung-si and deducting the auction costs from the proceeds thereof;

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement as to the claim for partition of co-owned property, the land indicated in the order (hereinafter “instant land”) is owned by the Plaintiff with shares of 1393/2083, Defendant B, Defendant C with 571/2083, and Defendant C with 119/2083, and it is recognized that no agreement has been reached between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the method of partition of the instant land, which is a co-owner of the instant land, until the closing date of argument. Thus, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant land, may file a claim for partition of land against the Defendants, other co-owners

2. Method of partition of co-owned property;

A. Generally, the division of an article jointly owned by a trial is in principle made in kind as long as it is possible to make a reasonable division according to the share of each co-owner. However, if it is impossible to divide the article in kind in kind or it is anticipated that the value of the article might decrease substantially if the division in kind might decrease substantially, an auction may be held. Here, the phrase "in the case of a unable to be divided in kind" includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the article in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use status, use value after the division, etc. of the article in question, not physically strict interpretation. It includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the article in kind, and it includes cases where the value of the article to be owned independently by the co-owner might decrease substantially compared with the share value before the division.

(See Supreme Court Decision 91Da27228 delivered on November 12, 1991, and Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580 delivered on April 12, 2002, etc.) B.

Based on the above legal doctrine, comprehensively taking into account the health account of the method of dividing the land in this case and the written evidence No. 1, the purport of the entire pleadings is as to the Plaintiff’s share ownership, receipt on September 25, 2013 of the Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch Office.