1. Plaintiffs B, C, D, E, F, G,J, K, L, M, M, N, P, Q, Q, Q, Q, S, T, U, V, X, Y, AD, AE, AH, AH, AM, AM, AO, Q, respectively.

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

Prior to the filing of the instant lawsuit by the Plaintiffs, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiffs for partition of co-owned property as to the land for 39,419 square meters in Nam-gu AV, Nam-gu, Daejeon District Court 2013da17819 (hereinafter “instant land”) with the Ulsan District Court (hereinafter “Ulsan District Court”) was significant in this Court.

As a lawsuit of partition of co-owned property, the court in the lawsuit of partition of co-owned property is entitled to divide the co-owned property in a reasonable manner with free discretion, without being able to seek by the person who requested the partition of the co-owned property. Thus, there is a difference in the purport of the claim regarding

Even if the co-owned property is identical to the co-owned property subject to division, it will be the same litigation.

Therefore, while a lawsuit seeking partition of co-owned property as to the land of this case is pending, filing a lawsuit again against the plaintiffs is unlawful as it violates the prohibition of double lawsuit.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed in its entirety, and since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair in a different conclusion, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning plaintiffs B, C, D, E, F, G,J, K, L, M, N, P, Q, Q, U, V, W, X, Y, AE, AE, AE, AH, AM, AM, Qu, ASS, ASS, ASS, AS, and Clean C&C, A, Z, I, Z, Z, AB, AB, AC, AF, AG, AI, AI, AK, K, H, NA, NA, NA, AP, AP, and AT in its judgment is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.