1. The amount of each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 remaining after being put up for an auction and subtracting the auction cost from the price;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to as “instant real estate”) is a real estate jointly owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendants, and each co-ownership share of the Plaintiff and the Defendants is listed in the separate sheet Nos. 2.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the method of dividing the instant real estate.

[Reasons for Recognition] Defendant C: The non-contentious facts, the entries in Gap evidence 1-1 and 2, the whole purport of pleadings, and the remaining defendants: Each confession (Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff, as co-owners of the instant real estate, may claim a partition of co-owned property against the Defendants, who are other co-owners pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

B. In the case of dividing the jointly-owned property by a trial, it is a principle that it is divided in kind, but if it is impossible to divide it in kind or it is possible to divide it in kind, the value thereof may be reduced remarkably, the auction of the jointly-owned property may be ordered.

The requirement of "shall not be divided in kind" is not a physically strict interpretation, but it includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide the property in kind in light of the nature, location, area, utilization status, and the use value after the division.

"Where the value of a portion is likely to be reduced significantly if it is divided in kind" includes cases where, even if a co-owner is a person, the value of the portion to be owned independently due to the division in kind is likely to be significantly reduced compared to the value of the share before the division (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580, Apr. 12, 2002).

Considering the following circumstances, the real estate of this case is not able to be divided in kind or is divided in kind in kind in consideration of the 1 and 2 items of evidence Nos. 2-1 and 2 and the purport of the entire pleadings.