“No further actions after April 2022 are perceived as one-time content proof”
Possibility of dispute through major law firms and legal risks reviewed
“Considering immediate reevaluation request and follow-up measures”,
,
,
,
,
,
, ‘Innogrid countered that they did not intentionally omit important matters such as major shareholder disputes in the securities registration statement. It has been just 5 days since the Korea Exchange disapproved the validity of the preliminary approval for listing on the KOSDAQ market.’,
,
, ‘Innogrid stated on the 24th that they have not been involved in any lawsuits while preparing for listing and have never concealed issues that were not intentional.’,
,
, ‘They explained that when they submitted the preliminary examination application for listing in February 2023, there were no ongoing lawsuits which is why it was not included in the securities registration statement.’,
,
, ‘Innogrid stated, “The omission of past management disputes and ongoing disputes is not a major shareholder dispute but a one-time content proof with malicious intent to have different content according to an objective judgment.”‘,
,
, ‘According to Innogrid, they received content proof from Mr. A, the existing major shareholder, in April 2022. The requested content was to ‘hear Innogrid’s opinion’.’,
,
, ‘Innogrid said, “We recognized it as a one-time content proof with malicious intent since there has been no additional content proof, contact, lawsuit filing, etc., until the submission of the securities registration statement this year.”‘,
,
, ‘They further stated, “There is a difference of opinion with the Korea Exchange regarding the omission of management dispute content, and at the time, it was difficult to judge it as a management dispute, and even more difficult to predict the possibility of future disputes.”‘,
,
, ‘According to Innogrid, Mr. A is currently in overseas exile on charges of embezzlement and breach of trust related to the delisting of a KOSDAQ-listed company. Although Mr. A became the largest shareholder of Innogrid in 2017, he did not provide any financial support to the company thereafter. Kim Myung-jin, who was the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) at the time, personally invested in the company and revived it as the only executive among all.’,
,
, ‘Innogrid said, “Shortly after receiving preliminary approval and submitting the securities registration statement in February 2024, Park raised another complaint. The timing of the complaint raises suspicions about its intent. It was concluded as one of the cases where companies seek investment or go public and make malicious claims for money.”‘,
,
, ‘They added, “As there was only one ‘opinion request’ content proof in April 2022, it was very difficult for us to consider it a dispute” and emphasized once again, “As of now, there are no lawsuits against us.”‘,
,
, ‘Innogrid explained that during the preparation of the securities registration statement, they received opinions from a major law firm that the possibility of dispute is low and the legal risks to the company are not significant.’,
,
, ‘They stated, “We are considering various follow-up measures such as applying for immediate reevaluation according to the KOSDAQ market listing regulations” and added, “We will not yield to the one-sided claims of the complainant who is currently in overseas exile.”‘,
,
,