logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.11.03 2015가단506258
공유물분할
Text

1. The amount remaining after deducting the expenses for auction from the price of each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 put up for auction;

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) is jointly owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendants in their respective shares in the separate sheet No. 2 attached hereto.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendants did not agree on the division of co-owned properties relating to each of the instant real property.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts acknowledged above, the Plaintiff, a co-owner, may file a claim against the Defendants for partition of each of the instant real estate pursuant to Articles 268 and 269 of the Civil Act.

(b) If consultation as to the method of partition of co-owned property, does not lead to an agreement on the method of partition, co-owners may request a court for partition, and if it is impossible to divide in kind in kind or the value thereof might be reduced remarkably due to such partition, the court may order an auction of things;

(Article 269 of the Civil Act). Co-owned property partition by judgment is, in principle, divided in kind as far as it is possible to make a reasonable partition according to the share of co-owners. However, if it is impossible to divide in kind or in kind, and if it is apprehended that the value would be significantly reduced, an auction may be ordered to divide in kind. In the payment, the requirement that "it is not possible to divide in kind" is not physically strict interpretation. It includes cases where it is difficult or inappropriate to divide in kind in light of the nature, location, area, use situation, and use value after the division.

I would like to say.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da4580 delivered on April 12, 2002). In light of the above legal principles, the Plaintiff, among co-owners of each real estate of this case, refers to the auction of each real estate of this case, as follows: (a) the Plaintiff, among co-owners of each real estate of this case, refers to the auction of each real estate of this case.

arrow