1. The Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Large 601m2.1m2:

(a) A ship that connects each point in the annexed Form 1, 2, 8, 10, 6, and 1.

Basic Facts

On December 17, 2018, the Plaintiff sold to the Defendant the share of KRW 5,187,534,000 in the purchase price of KRW 5,187,534,00 in the Gangnam-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant land”) and 1/5 of the building on its land owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer for the said share pursuant to the instant sales contract on December 21, 2018.

The land of this case is a site on which a building was constructed on that ground, but as of the closing date of pleadings, the above building was demolished.

Meanwhile, on February 12, 2019, D Co., Ltd. completed the registration of creation of a mortgage around KRW 20,484,00,000 for the debtor, the maximum debt amount, and the building on the instant land and its ground.

[Reasons for Recognition] Fact-finding, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the above fact-finding that the plaintiff, co-owner of the land of this case, can file a claim for partition of co-owned land of this case against the defendants, who are co-owners of the land of this case.

As to this, the defendant, around December 2018, concluded a special agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant to choose not to divide the land of this case, so the plaintiff cannot make a claim for subdivision of the land of this case for five years pursuant to Article 268 (1) of the Civil Code, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

The defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

In the case of a claim for partition of co-owned property under Article 269 of the Civil Act, the court may order the auction of the property in kind only when it is impossible to divide the co-owned property in kind or when the value thereof is likely to be reduced remarkably due to the division. Thus, the court is in principle to divide the property in kind, unless there are such circumstances as above. Thus, it is possible to divide the property in kind and there is a need to do so, and there is no concern that the value may be reduced remarkably due to the division, and the value of the property acquired by each co-owner