1. Of the landing 2,58 square meters in Daegu Northern-gu E, Daegu, the number of points indicated in the annexed Form 2 Appraisal Map (Plaintiff) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,11 shall be the same in sequence.

1. The allegation and the decision-making Plaintiffs own 496/3,580 shares of 3,580 square meters in Daegu Northern-gu E-si, Daegu-gu (hereinafter “the instant land”). Defendant C owns 4,859 shares of 8,950 shares in the instant land, and Defendant D owns 9/50 shares in the instant land. The Plaintiffs seek that the Defendants and the instant land should be divided as stated in the purport of the claim, on the ground that consultation on the method of dividing the instant land did not exist.

According to the result of on-site inspection of the land in this case, it can be seen that there is a road through which vehicles can pass in the direction of the left side of the land in this case (the results of the cadastral status survey in annexed Form 1 also referred to as the road in the direction of the two Koreas; hereinafter referred to as the "inter-Koreas"). On the north side of the land in this case, the land in annexed Form 1 is connected to H before, before, before and after the J, and the land in this case with the land in annexed Form 1. (2) The land in annexed Form 2 appraisal map (Plaintiff) is connected with the land in annexed Form 1, one point among the parts that combine the 1 and 11 of the land in annexed Form 2 appraisal map. (3) The road in this case is not easily accessible to the land in addition to the road in the direction of the two Koreas or the above sub-section connected to the road in this case.

Therefore, considering the shape, method of use, utility value, etc. of the land of this case as seen above, the method of dividing the portion of the land of this case with a certain point from among the parts adjacent to the road of this case between South and North Korea as a reference point is deemed the most impartial and reasonable.

On the other hand, the Defendants are likely to install a entrance and use the instant land in the part abutting on the two Koreas road of this case among the instant land, and the part connected to the said road can also be used. Therefore, the Plaintiff also uses the instant road in consideration of the current status of the use of the instant land by the Defendants.