● Toray directors cannot be said to be fulfilling their responsibilities as a parent company if they do nothing while a subsidiary continues to damage shareholder value. (Omitted）The proposal for this year’s AGM is for Toray to follow the “Practical Guidelines for Group Governance Systems” issued by METI. We would like Toray management to understand the purpose of the proposal and seriously consider the issue of parent-child listings.

●Toray, in issuing a dissenting opinion to our shareholder proposal stated the reason for making Chori as “listed” subsidiary was “to enable it to broadly acquire talented people, an important management resource for a trading company, and to also provide them with proper motivation.” First, listing a subsidiary to attract talent is inappropriate. Second, if Chori is truly being listed for that purpose, as stated in the convocation notice, then why is Toray International, a similar trading company as Chori, also not listed? It seems to us that the rationale was determined only after deciding to oppose our proposal which led to such a contradictory opinion being expressed.

●A message for Mr. Ohya who was appointed as a director to Chori the other day. (Omitted) The focus on parent-child listing will only continue to become stricter. Please play a leading role in reviewing Toray and Chori’s parent-child listing

●The shareholder proposal was based on the premise that Toray would continue the parent-child listing and so are for how to increase the shareholder value of the entire Toray group. However, in reality we are not arguing that a subsidiary should not be listed for inappropriate reasons, we are saying that the parent-subsidiary listing should be abolished.