1. The remaining amount after deducting the auction cost from the proceeds of the sale by selling the real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff.

Comprehensively taking account of the respective entries and arguments in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the fact that the plaintiff shares 1/6 shares and the defendant shares the real estate listed in the annexed sheet (hereinafter "the real estate in this case"), the plaintiff and the defendant share 5/6 shares, and there is no separate agreement prohibiting division as to the real estate in this case, and there is no agreement regarding the method of division as to the real estate in this case until the closing of argument. According to the above facts, the plaintiff, the co-owner of the real estate in this case, can claim the division of the real estate in this case, which is co-owner of

In principle, the partition of co-owned property by judgment on the method of partition shall be made in kind as long as it is possible to make a rational partition according to the share of each co-owner. However, even if it is impossible in kind or it is possible in form, if the value thereof might be reduced remarkably, the auction of the co-owned property may be ordered, and if the price is likely to be reduced remarkably, the price may be divided in kind. However, in the payment division, the requirement that "it may not be divided in kind" is not physically strict interpretation, but physically strict interpretation is not to include cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use situation of the co-owned property, use value after the partition

(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the following circumstances are as follows: (a) The apartment building of this case constitutes a separate building of an apartment that is a multi-family housing; (b) the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of this case for auction division without agreement on the division of the jointly owned property with the Defendant; (c) the Defendant did not appear on the date of pleading; and (d) the method of the division of the real estate of this case was also expressed any opinion.