1. The plaintiff 1.1. the remainder of the 256m2 in G Jin-si, which was put to an auction and the auction cost was deducted from the price.

1. In full view of the entries in Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is recognized that the plaintiff and the defendants shared (1/16 shares in the plaintiff's shares, 1/16 shares in the defendants' shares, 1/16 shares in each of the above parties' shares) and that co-owned property partition consultation as to the land in this case has not been formed between the above parties.

Therefore, pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant land, can file a claim for partition of co-owned property against the Defendants.

2. In light of the following circumstances, the method of partition of co-owned property, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, if the share of defendant B was established, the said right to collateral security remains in the part owned by other co-owners if the said share was divided in kind in the present condition; the building exists on the land of this case; and all the plaintiff and the defendants fail to present a detailed method of partition in kind, it is difficult or inappropriate to seek equitable partition among co-owners while maintaining the utility value of the land of this case (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580, Apr. 12, 2002). Considering the above circumstances, it is the most equitable and reasonable method to put the land at auction for sale and distribute the remaining amount after deducting the auction expenses from the proceeds thereof to co-owners according to the share ownership ratio.

3. Conclusion, the land of this case shall be put to an auction and the payment shall be made in installments as ordered by the court below.