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 reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for deletion or addition as follows. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The text of the first instance judgment shall be deleted from 5th to 4th, and the following shall be added from 6th to 4th:

(4) Whether a business income under the Income Tax Act falls under the business income shall be determined according to ordinary social norms, considering the existence of the profit-making purpose of the business, the scale and frequency of the business, the attitude of the business, and other factors.

Even if the plaintiffs were to have actually earned the above income in 2012 and 2013, the plaintiffs were registered as business in order to apply simple expense rates later, and each of the 6 million won and 3 million won was generated once. In light of the profit purpose, size, frequency, attitudes, etc. of the other party to the sale, such as limited to the specific person M, it cannot be deemed that the other party to the sale has continuously and repeatedly been able to be viewed as business activities in light of the profit purpose, size, frequency, mode, etc., and thus, it is difficult to view that the revenue received by the plaintiffs as business operators of artificial fisheries or sales agency business constituted business income obtained by continuous and repeated activities for profit-making purposes.

2. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is just, and the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.