The ninth oral argument proceedings were held on May 14th, and we would like to report the following.

- The composition of the court has changed, so the arguments have been renewed (a formality). The presiding judge has not been replaced.

・The statement regarding the document we submitted yesterday was reserved. The reason given by the court was that "We did not originally ask the plaintiff to do anything, and since we received it yesterday at the last minute, we will reserve the statement for the time being. There are also doubts as to the extent to which it is related to the subject matter of this lawsuit and the subject of the trial."

・The plaintiff side will submit a written document by the next hearing date. The court has asked that the document include the following:

> The first item in the defendant's preparatory brief (4) is the defendant's argument in response to the plaintiff's argument. It may be self-evident to the plaintiff, but I would like to know whether the defendant's summary of the first item, "The plaintiff's argument is this," is correct, and whether the defendant's argument is confirmed point by point.

> I would like the plaintiff to make a statement on each of the three claims. It has also been pointed out that there are two questionable points, so I would like to know whether the plaintiff will make any further claims.

・The court said, "This lawsuit is an objective lawsuit between residents, and it concerns financial and accounting actions, so please consider it separately from the provisional disposition case itself." We replied, "We believe that the contents are related. Regarding the temporary suspension of construction in paragraph 3 of the purpose of the claim in the second case, we believe that the objective facts of the suspension of construction due to the guidelines are at issue. We believe that the situation is currently such that it cannot be carried out, but we wrote the plaintiff's preparatory document (7) with the intention of asking for an explanation as to why the requirements for temporary suspension in the guidelines do not apply (the defendant is writing it from his/her own perspective). We would like the defendant to respond." The court said that it will not ask the defendant to respond at this time, but that "If you can clarify in the next document submitted by the plaintiff that the contents stated in the plaintiff's preparatory document (7) are related to paragraph 3 of the purpose of the claim, the court will make a decision based on that."

The next hearing will be held on Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 11:30 a.m. in Courtroom 703 of the Tokyo District Court. We appreciate your continued support.