1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court of first instance is also examined in a thorough examination of the evidence additionally submitted in the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment by the court of first instance as to the legality of the disposition of this case are deemed legitimate

Therefore, the reasoning for the court’s explanation on the instant case is as follows: “Article 7(1)1(g)” to “Article 7(1)1(g)” to “Article 7(1)7,” to “Article 7-16” to “(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Du5551, Apr. 16, 2015)” to “(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Du4438, Feb. 15, 2008)”; “place of business” to “business” to “business” to “Article 207-1” to “Article 16” to “Article 207-53” to “Article 7(g) and “Article 7(1)1(g)” to “Article 7(1)1, 13-9 and 18-X” to “the total floor area exceeding 13-1614(1) of the Civil Procedure Act” to “the total area exceeding 161614’s square area.”

2. Determination on addition

A. The Plaintiffs asserts that, in light of the series of processes under which the Housing Construction and Sales Business Act is in progress, the construction and sales business should be deemed to have commenced at the time of commencing a new house or at the time of completion.

In this regard, Article 143(4)1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 22580, Dec. 30, 2010) is all the business operators who start a business anew in the pertinent taxable period.