The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1.(a)

In the so-called sectionally owned co-ownership relationship or mutual title trust relationship in which multiple persons have completed registration of an amount equivalent to the area of each sectional ownership for convenience, each co-owner of sectionally owned ownership disposes of his/her rights to another person, there may be cases where each co-owner disposes of a specific portion which is the object of sectional ownership, transfers his/her co-ownership shares on the register as a table for the specific portion, and disposes of them as a genuine co-ownership for the entire real estate as recorded in the register

Among them, in the case of the former, the relationship of sectional ownership is succeeded to the third party, but in the case of the latter, the third party acquires the share of the entire real estate and the relationship of sectional ownership is extinguished.

In addition, as in the auction, in order to fall under the former, the execution court shall evaluate the specific sectionally owned object, not co-ownership, and accordingly determine the minimum auction price and conduct an auction. In the absence of such circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the subject matter of the auction for the co-owner's share of real estate is, in principle, co-ownership of the entire real estate.

(Supreme Court Decision 2001Da21038 Decided November 30, 2001, and Supreme Court Decision 2013Da84421 Decided May 29, 201, etc.) B.

Meanwhile, the method of management of the jointly owned property is legitimate for a person who has a majority share in the jointly owned property to exclusively use and benefit from a specific part of the jointly owned property. However, even if the specific part is within the area equivalent to his/her share ratio, there are shares among the other co-owners, but there are no damages due to the failure to use and benefit from the property.