1. The remainder of the amount calculated by deducting the auction cost from the proceeds by selling the answer 2365m2 to the public auction in Gangnam-gun E-gun, Gangnam-gu.

1. The facts falling under any of the following subparagraphs may be found either as a dispute between the parties or as a whole by the purport of the entire pleadings:

The Plaintiff received a successful bid of 165/270 shares among 165/270 shares among 2365m2 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) in Gangnam-gun E-gun, Gangnam-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 21, 2014. Accordingly, the Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the instant real estate.

B. There was no agreement prohibiting division between the Plaintiff and the Defendants, and there was no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the division of the instant real estate until the date of the closing of the argument.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff and the Defendants shared the instant real estate. Since the Plaintiff and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the method of dividing the instant real estate by the date of the closing of argument, the Plaintiff may file a claim against the Defendants for the division of the instant real estate based on their co-ownership rights.

B. Furthermore, the Plaintiff seeks the division of the instant real estate by means of payment payment due to the difficulty in dividing the instant real estate in kind.

If it is impossible to divide, in kind, the article jointly owned, or if the value thereof is likely to be reduced remarkably due to the division, the court may order an auction of the article.

(Article 269(2) of the Civil Act. In principle, division of co-owned property by trial shall be made in kind as long as a reasonable partition can be made according to the share of each co-owner. However, the requirement that "it cannot be divided in kind" in the price division is not physically strict interpretation. It includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the co-owned property in kind in light of the nature, location, area, situation of use of the co-owned property, use value after the partition, etc.

It is also a co-owner's that "if it is divided in kind, if the value might be reduced remarkably, the value may be reduced remarkably."