Evidence No.59

When submitting a specific instance to the Japanese NCP, please complete all required fields in this form and send it by email to the designated NCP contact address (jpn-ncp@mofa.go.jp), along with any attachments.

• The Japanese NCP will review the submitted form to verify the completeness of required information and will send a written acknowledgment of receipt to the submitter.
• Submitted information will be shared with the company in question and, if other countries are involved, with the relevant NCPs of those countries. Submission of this form constitutes consent for such sharing.
• If you wish to exclude any specific content from being shared, please clearly indicate the relevant parts and the reason (e.g., redact the whistleblower's name in a separate redacted version).
• Please understand that (1) compliance with the OECD Guidelines by companies is voluntary, and (2) the NCP's role is to offer mediation when it determines the issue merits further examination during the initial assessment.

Shunsuke Kimura

[Redacted for privacy]

shukku9998@gmail.com

(Phone unavailable; email contact preferred)

Not applicable

Infroneer Holdings Corporation

Japan

10-2, Fujimi 2-chome, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-0071, Japan

• Contact Person: Unknown (only through whistleblower hotline)
• General Phone: 03-6380-8140
• Email: CSR@infroneer.com (listed on official website / Sustainability Department)

Infroneer Holdings Corporation is a publicly listed company based in Japan. Through its group company Maeda Seisakusho Co., Ltd., it established a 100%-owned subsidiary, MAEDA AMERICA Inc., in Houston, Texas on April 1, 2022.

Additionally, the company received a “AA” rating from MSCI ESG Ratings as of May 27, 2025, and discloses information in line with international ESG standards.

These facts establish that the company qualifies as a multinational enterprise under the OECD Guidelines.

A. Date of Occurrence:

FY2022 – Present (as of September 15, 2025, ongoing)

B. Country Where the Issue Occurred:

Japan

C. Background and Sequence of Events:

I, Shunsuke Kimura, while serving as a Senior Manager in the Facilities Division of Maeda Corporation's Kansai Branch, filed multiple real-name internal reports regarding:

• concealment of industrial accidents,
• disregard of internal whistleblower mechanisms,
• accounting irregularities, and
• retaliatory personnel actions.

All reports are documented and evidence-based. I filed whistleblower disclosures to multiple government agencies, including the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW), the Consumer Affairs Agency (CAA), the Financial Services Agency (FSA), and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI).

However, both Maeda Corporation and its parent company, Infroneer Holdings Corporation (“Infroneer HD”), refused to take any institutional action, failed to investigate, and provided no opportunity for dialogue. They subsequently issued a termination notice labeling my reports as “defamation”, resulting in my dismissal.

In April 2025, the CAA issued a formal notice to Infroneer HD pursuant to Article 11 of the Whistleblower Protection Act, requesting a review of its whistleblowing framework and implementation. The company has ignored this notice. The internal system remains dysfunctional, and no corrective action, compensation, or remediation has been implemented to date.

I believe these corporate actions constitute clear violations of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. I have published all supporting materials, records, and evidence on a dedicated website for public and international scrutiny.

Reasoning and Details:

1. Destruction of Internal Reporting Framework (Ch. II A10)
• I submitted eight real-name whistleblower reports (Reports No. 0–7) to Infroneer HD in March 2025, accompanied by evidence.
• Topics included concealment of industrial accidents, accounting fraud, and systemic failure of internal reporting.
• The company conducted no investigation and instead labeled me as a whistleblower "demanding JPY 20 billion," dismissing all reports.
• This constitutes systemic rejection of whistleblower protections.
2. Retaliatory Dismissal & Defamation (Ch. I-4 / II-2)
• On April 25, 2025, I was issued a dismissal notice citing "damage to company reputation."
• This is a direct act of retaliation for lawful whistleblowing, violating both domestic law and international principles.
• The legitimacy of my reports has been confirmed by police and government authorities.
3. Ignoring Corrective Notice from CAA (Ch. XI 1 & 2)
• On May 29, 2025, the Consumer Affairs Agency issued a corrective notice requesting a review of whistleblower system compliance.
• Infroneer HD has ignored this entirely, failing to initiate any dialogue or corrective measures.
• This violates the duty to engage in good-faith remediation under Chapter XI.
4. Financial Misrepresentation & Audit Failures (Ch. VIII-7)
• The company excluded whistleblower-related costs, severance expenditures, and 52 concealed labor accidents from financial disclosures.
• This constitutes misleading disclosure to investors, regulators, and stakeholders.
• Auditors failed to identify or correct these omissions, pointing to a breakdown in internal controls.
5. These actions are not merely guideline violations but constitute serious structural breaches that are unacceptable under international standards. They exceed the level of conduct expected of companies under voluntary compliance and undermine institutional trust in Japan as a member of the OECD. Urgent international remedial action is required.

The full details of this case—including whistleblower reports, administrative responses, and PDF evidence—are publicly documented at the following dedicated site:

https://www.whistleblower-protection.org/

1. Reconstruction of the Whistleblower System (Ch. II A10 / Ch. XI)
• Require the company to rebuild an effective internal reporting mechanism.
• Demand disclosure of initial response records and clarification of retaliatory actions.
2. Compensation for Retaliatory Dismissal
• Confirm the illegality of the dismissal and begin negotiations for structural model compensation based on international benchmarks.
• Address economic losses, reputational harm, and loss of career opportunities.
3. Initiation of Good-Faith Dialogue under NCP Mediation
• Establish a neutral platform for remediation.
• Prevent further rejection or suppression of whistleblower reports.

Note: Direct dialogue with the company is no longer viable. I request the NCP to mediate a resolution aligned with international norms.

(1) Relevant Legal Provisions in the Country Where the Issue Occurred

1. Whistleblower Protection Act (as revised and effective from June 11, 2025)
• Article 1 (Purpose)

The purpose of this Act is to ensure the early detection and correction of legal violations by businesses and to protect workers who make whistleblower reports.

• Article 10 (Prohibition of Disadvantageous Treatment Based on Whistleblowing)

Businesses must not dismiss or otherwise treat workers disadvantageously on the grounds that they have made a whistleblower report.

• Article 11 (Obligation to Establish an Internal Whistleblower Response System)

Businesses must establish necessary internal systems to appropriately receive whistleblower reports from workers, conduct investigations, and implement corrective measures.

2. Industrial Safety and Health Act
• Article 100 (Prohibition of False Reporting)

Any individual who submits a false report regarding an occupational accident or related matter may be subject to penalties.

3. Financial Instruments and Exchange Act
• Article 158 (False Statements)

Submitting false statements in securities reports or other disclosure documents constitutes a criminal offense and/or is subject to administrative penalties.

4. Civil Code Article 709 (Claims for Damages Based on Torts)
• This provision serves as the basis for damage claims in cases involving defamation, wrongful dismissal, or financial harm.

A. Status of Parallel Proceedings:

Parallel proceedings: Yes

B. If Parallel Proceedings Exist:

① Countries and Institutions Involved in Parallel Proceedings

Japan:

• Consumer Affairs Agency (CAA)
• Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW)
• Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI)
• Financial Services Agency (FSA)
• Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT)
• Osaka Higashi Police Department

Media Institutions:

• NHK Osaka Broadcasting Station

Private Financial and Audit Entities:

• Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (MUFG)
• Hokusei Law Office (MUFG Audit Hotline Secretariat)

Planned International Bodies:

• OECD Japanese NCP (initiated through this submission)
• OECD NCPs in other countries (e.g., United States, France)
• United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGP)

Verified Domestic Institutions:

• Official confirmation by government bodies (e.g., police recognition of legality, corrective notice from CAA) affirm the validity of the whistleblower’s claims. The submission is supported by both domestic and international legal frameworks.

② Description, Background, and Current Status of Parallel Proceedings

Between 2023 and 2025, the whistleblower submitted reports to various administrative, financial, and media entities both within Japan and internationally. The following are the status and developments to date:

• Consumer Affairs Agency (CAA):

Eight whistleblower reports and supporting documents were formally submitted between March and May 2025. On May 29, the CAA issued an official corrective notice requesting confirmation of whistleblower system functionality and effective operation.

→ The company has ignored this notice. Further administrative enforcement has been suspended.

• Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW):

Reports were filed detailing the concealment of 52 unreported occupational accidents and systemic whistleblowing failures.

→ The ministry responded by shifting responsibility to the CAA, exposing administrative inconsistency and jurisdictional gaps.

• FSA / METI / MLIT:

Reports were submitted highlighting legal violations and supervisory inaction.

→ Some were formally acknowledged, but no effective corrective measures have been implemented.

• Osaka Higashi Police Department:

In late March 2025, all relevant evidence was submitted and formally received. The police continue to examine the material, confirming the legal legitimacy of the whistleblower’s claims from a third-party investigative standpoint.

→ The whistleblower continues to provide supplemental documentation in compliance with applicable laws to ensure no legal violations in the whistleblowing activities.

• NHK (Media):

Multiple disclosures and communications were submitted, including documents on dismissal, disregard of administrative corrective action, and notification of system denial during April and May.

→ As of now, NHK has declined to proceed with reporting, indicating a “watch-and-wait” stance.

• MUFG and Associated Hotline:

A whistleblower report was submitted via the accounting audit hotline, and the CAA’s corrective notice was shared.

→ As of June, MUFG has announced the suspension of individual responses, effectively serving as evidence of internal communication shutdown.

③ Outlook and Future Steps

Within Japan’s domestic framework, the company’s refusal to comply with administrative corrective orders and its dismissal of the whistleblower—framing him as defamatory—clearly demonstrates a systemic failure.

As such, this case now enters a new phase focused on international remediation through formal submissions to:

• OECD Japanese NCP, and
• NCPs in other jurisdictions where the company operates (e.g., United States, France).

The whistleblower aims to internationalize the mediation process and establish multilateral agreements to ensure accountability.

In parallel, public explanations will continue to be provided to media, financial institutions, and shareholders, to demand good-faith responses and a comprehensive compensation framework (including preventive reforms).