1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

Defendant C from the Plaintiff, 1,936,639 won, and Defendant D and E respectively.

1. The real estate in this case, as the plaintiff's heir, 299/425 shares, 54/2975 shares, 36/2975 shares, 36/2975 shares, Defendant F, G, H, I, J, and K jointly own shares, 126/2975 shares, respectively. The fact that the plaintiff and the defendants did not reach an agreement on the method of dividing the real estate in this case does not conflict between the parties, or that the agreement on the method of dividing the real estate in this case was not reached between the plaintiff and the defendants can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the whole purport of the pleadings as stated in the evidence Nos. 1, 2-1 through 4, and 3-1 through 9.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant real estate, may file a claim against the Defendants, who are the remaining co-owners, for the partition of the instant land, which is jointly owned pursuant to Article 269(1) of

2. Method of partition of co-owned property;

A. According to the relevant legal principles 1), in a case of dividing an article jointly owned by a trial, the court shall, in principle, divide the article in kind into the form of money, and only when the value of the article is likely to be significantly reduced if it is impossible to divide it into the form of money or to divide it into the form of money, the court may order an auction of the article. Furthermore, it is reasonable to acquire the article jointly owned by a specific person in question by comprehensively taking into account the causes of the sharing relationship, the ratio of co-ownership, the economic value of the co-ownership in the case of the division, the wishes of co-owners for the division method, etc. In special circumstances where the acquisition of the price of the article jointly owned by another co-owner does not undermine the substantial fairness among the co-owners, it is permissible to divide the article jointly owned by one of the co-owners into the sole or several co-owners, but the co-owners who own the article in kind are allowed to pay the price of the article in kind in a proper and reasonable manner to other co-owners (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Da38349, May 2, 2012).