Attached Form

The remainder of the proceeds from the sale of each real estate listed in the list after deducting the auction cost.

1. The Plaintiff and the Defendants share each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) at the ratio of 1/3, respectively.

There was no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the method of dividing the instant real estate.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts acknowledged as above, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant real estate, may file a claim for partition against the Defendants, who are other co-owners, pursuant to Articles 268(1) and 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. In the case of dividing the co-owned property through a trial, if it is impossible to divide the co-owned property in kind or if the value of the property is likely to be significantly reduced, the auction of the property may be ordered, and the "not to divide the property in kind" shall not be physically strict interpretation, but it shall include cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the property in kind in light of the nature, location, size, situation of use and use value after the division, etc. In the case of the co-owner's division, "the value of the property might be significantly reduced if it is divided in kind" includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the property in kind even if the co-owner's own property is divided in kind, the value of the property can be significantly reduced compared to the share value of the property before the division. (See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da40219, 4026, Sep. 10, 2009).