beta
Text
1. Of the forest land of 202,315 square meters in Kimcheon-si;
(a) Appendix 1. An appraisal in sequence 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 39, 40, and 1, respectively.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. With respect to the land of this case, the ownership transfer registration under the name of the Plaintiff, Defendant B, C, D, E, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, K, L, M, X,Y, and net AA was completed, as indicated in the “public land portion” column in attached Table 3.
B. AA died on November 16, 1997. The heir was the defendant N,O, P, Q and net AB, who is the child, and the heir was the defendant R, the child of the deceased AC (Death on March 8, 1995), the defendant R, the child of the deceased, the defendant S and T.
C. AB died on December 16, 2015, and the heir was Defendant V and W, the spouse of the Defendant U and his children.
Even until the closing date of the instant case, there was no agreement between the Plaintiff and some Defendants on the division of the instant forest and the method of division.
[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole argument
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of recognition, since an agreement on the division method was not reached between the Plaintiff and some Defendants sharing the forest of this case, the Plaintiff may request a court to divide the land of this case pursuant to Articles 268 and 269 of the Civil Act.
B. Taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the method of partition of co-owned property as indicated in subparagraph 1; (b) the current status of the instant real estate as well as the intent of the Plaintiff and some Defendants, which can be known by comprehensively taking into account the results of appraisal commission and the overall purport of the pleadings against the head of the Daegu-Gyeongbuk District Headquarters Kimcheon Branch of the Republic of Korea National Land Information Corporation, the method of partition of co-owned property as indicated in the text of the instant forest
3. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.