beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.
2. The real estate listed in the separate sheet shall be put up for auction and proceeds from the sale.
Reasons
1. Judgment as to the main claim
A. As to the real estate listed in the separate sheet stating the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion (hereinafter “instant real estate”), the Plaintiff owned 295/300 shares, and the Defendant owned the remainder of 5/300 shares, respectively. However, the Plaintiff’s possession of the entire instant real estate from May 16, 191 to May 16, 191, occupied the entire instant real estate for 20 years as the intention of ownership. As such, the prescriptive prescription was completed on May 17, 201.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on May 17, 201 with respect to the instant real estate to the Plaintiff.
B. Unless there exist any special circumstances, even if one of the co-owners occupies all of the co-owners, it shall be deemed as holding another co-owner's share within the scope of the ratio of shares of other co-owners due to the nature of the source of authority (see Supreme Court Decision 95Da51861, Jul. 26, 1996). Thus, in order for the owner's possession to be converted into the possession with the intention of possession with the intention of possession again by a new source of authority, the owner of the real estate must bear the burden of proving the conversion, and the owner who asserts it
(See Supreme Court Decision 94Da48165 delivered on February 28, 1995). In this case, the Plaintiff’s primary claim premised on the completion of the acquisition by prescription for shares owned by the Defendant is without merit, on the ground that there is no assertion or proof as to the Plaintiff’s possession of the shares of 5/300, which is the Defendant’s shares, by a new title.
2. The partition of co-owned property, based on the judgment on the conjunctive claim, shall be, in principle, based on the method of spot partition as long as it is possible to make a rational partition according to the shares of each co-owner, but if it is impossible in kind or if it is possible in form, if the price might be reduced remarkably due to such cause, the co-owned property