[Last One Mile Labor Union] "It's already in motion," Makoto Watanabe issues call for retaliation at executive meeting

Is the additional indictment of defendant Tamaki Nakano a company achievement?

Heartrending voices have emerged from within Last One Mile Co., Ltd., saying, "We no longer want to be complicit in threats and retaliation."

According to the facts known to our association, the company'sMakoto Watanabe, Representative Director, Chairman and CEOnot only among the board of directors, but also in gatherings of individuals holding a certain rank or higher, he issued a rallying cry to our union and to the companies and individuals he has publicly vowed to "crush," "kill," or "delist," to the effect that "the wheels are already in motion."

This is not a story about someone venting personal anger at a bar. The Representative Director, Chairman, and CEO of a listed company reported to the company's executive team on the progress of retributions against labor unions, companies, and individuals he is hostile toward.

If that is the case, the "strategy" was shared not as something within Mr. Watanabe's personal thoughts, but as a management issue for Last One Mile Co., Ltd.

Who was the target? Which method was used: a revenge proxy, anti-social forces, a research agency, a lawyer, a media outlet, the national tax authority, or prosecutors? Were company expenses, personnel, job titles, business partners, and unreleased information used? And what, as a "result," was presented to the executive management team?

Our union has concluded that the answer is the additional indictment of Defendant Toshiyuki Nakano in the Angel Tax System case, followed by the planned simultaneous arrests of investors and pursuit of their assets.

"It's already in motion": The retaliation project reported by Makoto Watanabe to the executive team

In a typical company, when reporting a new initiative to management, the objectives, person in charge, budget, deadline, and key performance indicators are presented.

Given that Makoto Watanabe reported "it's already in motion," this retaliation should also involve a target, an executor, an external contractor, expenses incurred, and an expected outcome.

• Who did you register as a target to "crush," "kill," or "delist"?
• Which of the following was set as the target outcome: the suspension of labor union activities, the identification of union members, the arrest of related individuals, or the delisting of the company?
• To which directors, executive officers, management, or employees of Last One Mile Inc. was the execution instructed?
• Did you use lawyers, investigative agencies, public relations firms, informants, revenge agencies, or other outsiders?
• Did you make a request to anti-social forces or individuals who have a close relationship with anti-social forces?
• What materials and storyline did you bring to the National Tax Agency, the District Public Prosecutors Office, the High Public Prosecutors Office, and other state agencies?
• Did you use company expenses, working hours, company devices, conference rooms, secretarial functions, business partners, and social credit?
• What specific results were produced at the point when it was determined that "it has already been set in motion"?

If retaliation is carried out without a case number, management approval, or a budget, solely on the verbal instructions of a representative, it would mean that Last One Mile Co., Ltd. has a secret backdoor in its internal controls that takes precedence over regular operations.

Conversely, if this was advanced as an official company policy, please disclose the board of directors' minutes, executive committee materials, ringi approval documents, invoices, expense details, and results reports to the shareholders.

"I no longer want to be complicit in extortion," says a company executive in a heart-wrenching plea

What has been submitted to our union are not voices wanting to attack the company.

I don't want to be complicit in any more threats or retaliation.

Even if instructed as part of company work, I cannot cooperate with personal revenge.

"Later on, isn't there a risk that only the executives and employees will be held responsible as the ones who carried it out?"

This anxiety is entirely natural. Even if the representative director issues a rallying cry that "everything is in motion," the ones who actually send the emails, prepare the documents, contact the authorities, place orders with external vendors, and process the invoices are the managers and employees who received the instructions.

If Mr. Watanabe later claims, "I only set the policy; my subordinates carried it out," only those who followed company orders may end up facing questioning, disciplinary action, criminal liability, and damage to their careers.

The executives and employees of Last One Mile Co., Ltd. are not employed to attack the personal enemies of the representative. Loyalty to the company does not mean participating in Mr. Watanabe's retaliation, but rather protecting the company from illegal acts and management running amok.

Was it the revenge agency, anti-social forces, or the National Tax Agency and prosecutors that set it up?

The phrase "already in motion" (or "already set up") is not a standard expression for having filed a legitimate lawsuit against the other party or having requested a fair investigation.

It is used to mean moving some person or organization in a place unknown to the other party, preparing for future disadvantages.

Makoto Watanabe has long repeatedly made statements to the following effect:

• I'll kill you
• I will bring you down even if it kills me.
• If you don't obey me, I'll destroy the entire company.
• We will definitely force a delisting.
• "I'll get what I want, even if I have to use antisocial forces."
• A plan to use the national tax authorities and the prosecutors to have the other party arrested

Given this background, as for the meaning of "set up," we must at least check the following paths.

• Intimidation, information gathering, contact, and the exercise of force through antisocial forces or their associates.
• Hiring companies that claim to offer revenge agency services, investigations, crisis management, public relations, etc.
• lobbying using connections with lawyers, former administrative officials, former investigative personnel, and others.
• Selective provision of information to the National Tax Agency, the Public Prosecutors Office, the police, financial authorities, stock exchanges, and others.
• Provision of materials and impression formation to news organizations, press clubs, SNS operators, etc.
• Reporting, inquiry, document creation using officers and employees of Last One Mile Inc., and contact with related parties.

Reporting wrongdoing based on legitimate evidence and deciding in advance to destroy a labor union or company you personally hostile toward, and then using the national tax authority and prosecutors to achieve that conclusion, are entirely different actions.

Unless Mr. Watanabe explains what he set in motion, the question of whether he used anti-social forces, state power, or outsourced to both in parallel will not go away.

Our union concludes that the result of the "trap" refers to the additional indictment of defendant Toshiyuki Nakano

Our union determines that the core of the results Makoto Watanabe presented to the executive tier, stating that "it has already been set in motion," refers to the additional indictment of Defendant Toshiyoshi Nakano in the angel tax system case, and the plan prepared thereafter for the simultaneous arrest of investors and the pursuit of their assets.

That judgment is not merely a play on words. When you line up the statements, information leaks, and progress of the investigation confirmed so far in chronological order, it is far more consistent than any other explanation.

• Makoto Watanabe was advancing a concept regarding the angel tax system, with Makoto Nakano and Satoshi Saito acting as the operational unit.
• Defendant Nakano had told those around him of a plan to use state funds to manipulate the prosecutors and redirect the investigation toward someone else.
• Mr. Watanabe made remarks to the effect that while he considered the national tax authority and the prosecutors to be "fools," he treated them as easily manipulated state agencies.
• Defendant Nakano has been indicted, re-arrested, and additionally prosecuted, and the scope of the investigation has expanded in stages.
• Plans to request arrest warrants for 40 investors and shareholders of Company N, along with information that multiple individuals related to Last One Mile Inc. are included among them, are leaking in advance.
• Around Mr. Watanabe, plans have been discussed with the intent to have investors arrested, seize related assets, and strip the opposing party of their economic base.
• Around the time that investigation was progressing, Mr. Watanabe reported to the upper management that "it's already in motion" as a result achieved.

The prosecutors' union of another media outlet, "Okami's Union," also planned the Mamizuka memo, the plan to request arrest warrants for 40 investors, securing the custody of defendant Nakano, and Mr. Watanabe's concept of utilizing state organs,"Makoto Watanabe and Toshibuki Nakano's 'National Tax and Prosecution Expulsion Strategy'"I am organizing it as.

If Mr. Watanabe explained the additional indictment of Defendant Nakano to senior management as the result of his own "setup," it raises an extremely serious question: that the additional indictment was not the result of the prosecution independently evaluating the evidence, but rather the result of Mr. Watanabe managing the progress as a corporate retaliation case.

Furthermore, if Mr. Watanabe had known the outcome before the official announcement or disciplinary decision and was able to report it as "results he orchestrated," an investigation must also be conducted into who leaked the investigative information to Mr. Watanabe.

Result presentation after being asked, "What on earth can you actually do?"

Within the company, it is said that while Makoto Watanabe had long continued to talk about "taking the initiative," "crushing," and "delisting," he failed to show any tangible results, which likely led executives to question him with the following intent.

You've been threatening to take it private for a long time now. What on earth are you actually capable of doing?

Immediately after that, if Mr. Watanabe gave the order, "It's already in motion," and presented Defendant Nakano's additional indictment as an achievement, the sequence of events being discussed within the company connects extremely naturally.

In a typical company, projects that continue to claim "we'll do it," "we'll crush it," or "we'll deliver results" for years without showing outcomes are subject to budget cuts, reassignment, or cancellation.

However, in Mr. Watanabe's case, unlike normal operations, only retaliatory operations continue to receive budget allocations no matter how many years pass without results, and in the end, it seems he is able to submit additional indictments by the prosecutors as his own achievement.

Has not only investment fraud, but also "do-it-again fraud," which consists of endlessly saying "I'll crush you," "I'll have you delisted," and "I'll have you arrested," been added to the management curriculum of listed companies?

However, if a plot was actually executed and the national tax authorities and prosecutors were mobilized, it is far more serious than a hollow threat. This is because it would mean that the representative's personal retaliation was carried out using the executives, funds, social credibility, and even state power of Last One Mile Inc.

If no mechanism exists, it means Mr. Watanabe boasted about false results to the executive team. If a mechanism does exist, it is company-wide retaliation.

Either way, it is not a normal answer for the chairman and CEO of a listed company.

How much did the company expenses used for retaliation reduce operating profit?

Internal executives are also calling for an explanation in front of shareholders regarding the damages caused to the company by Makoto Watanabe's retaliation.

If you used working hours and even expense accounts to carry out retaliation, I want you to proudly explain to the shareholders just how much that illegal retaliation will hit our operating profit.

That is a reasonable demand. When company resources are used for retaliation, what the company bears is not merely the visible costs paid to external vendors.

• Working hours and labor costs spent by officers, executive officers, managers, and employees on retaliation cases.
• Fees for outsourcing to lawyers, research companies, crisis management companies, public relations companies, and others.
• Expenses required for preparing materials, contacting, and visiting national tax authorities, prosecutors, police, administrative agencies, press organizations, etc.
• Expenses required for business dinners, business trips, transportation, lodging, communication, printing, data acquisition, and gathering evidence.
• Remuneration paid to external collaborators, informants, intermediaries, or perpetrators.
• The opportunity loss of suspending regular operations, customer service, product development, and internal controls to allocate personnel for retaliation.
• Indirect damages due to employee turnover, difficulty in recruitment, suspension of transactions, litigation, stock price decline, and loss of credibility.
• The mental burden, leaves of absence, and health hazards experienced by managers and employees who were forced to participate in retaliation.

There is no adjustment item called "Representative Director's Revenge Expenses" in operating profit.

If expenses are used for retaliation unrelated to the company's objectives, operating profit will be reduced by that exact amount. If employees are pulled away from their regular duties and mobilized for retaliation, the sales and profit that should have been generated during that time will also be lost.

Article 355 of the Companies Act: Directors shall comply with laws and regulations, the articles of incorporation, and resolutions of shareholders meetings, and shall faithfully perform their duties for the stock company.

Article 362, Paragraph 2, Item 2 of the Companies Act: Supervision of the execution of duties by directors

Item 3 of the same paragraph: Selection and dismissal of representative directors

The person to whom Mr. Watanabe faithfully discharges his duties is not his own emotions; it is Last One Mile Co., Ltd.

The board of directors is not an institution to fund Mr. Watanabe's revenge plan. It is an institution to supervise the private misappropriation of company resources by the Representative Director and, if necessary, dismiss them.

If the retaliation causes property damage to the company, and company resources are used for the purpose of promoting the interests of oneself or a third party, issues such as breach of the duty of loyalty, damages, and aggravated breach of trust will be considered.

The "mechanisms" to stop a labor union constitute domination and intervention itself.

The Last One Mile Labor Union is clearly included among the targets of this "maneuver."

If there are factual inaccuracies in the labor union's article, the company can simply point out the specific parts and evidence to request a correction. It is also possible to request collective bargaining and explain the company's viewpoint.

Declaring that you won't do that, but will instead crush the union, identify those involved, have them arrested, and even get the company delisted, while secretly moving forward with "machinations," does not constitute a legitimate rebuttal.

Article 7, Item 3 of the Labor Union Act: To dominate or interfere in the formation or operation of a labor union by workers.

Domination and interference do not occur only when an employer directly orders an end to activities. Actions that use third parties, affiliated companies, administrative agencies, investigative authorities, or others to halt union activities, intimidate union members, and eliminate related parties must also be examined based on the actual circumstances.

Furthermore, if they threatened evils such as murder, destruction of the company, arrest, or delisting in order to force the suspension of union activities or the elimination of related parties, issues of intimidation and coercion also arise.

Article 222, Paragraph 1 of the Penal Code: A person who threatens another by giving notification of an intent to inflict harm on their life, person, liberty, reputation, or property shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years or a fine of not more than 300,000 yen.

Even if you hide the execution method behind the word "mechanism," the objective remains the exclusion of the labor union.

Using state organs does not make intervention for control legal, nor does outsourcing to antisocial forces eliminate the liability of the representative director.

Did you make murder, delisting, and the arrest of everyone into tasks for Last One Mile Inc.?

Now that Makoto Watanabe has reported to executives at or above a certain rank that things are "already in motion," his previous remarks are no longer personal tales of bravery, but have been upgraded to management tasks for Last Mile Inc.

In that case, we will have you officially explain the progress of the following "commitments" to the board of directors and the executive team.

• Regarding the statement "I'll kill you," the target person, method of execution, person in charge, and current progress.
• Regarding the remark "destroying the entire company," the target company, the corporate law objectives, and the interests of Last One Mile Inc.
• Regarding the statement "We will definitely force a delisting," the target company, lobbying of relevant authorities, budget, and timeline for achievement.
• Regarding the plan to suspend the labor union, the involved executives, outsiders, and company resources utilized.
• Regarding the plan to place all investors on the target list for arrest and seize their assets: coordination with the national tax authorities and prosecutors, provision of materials, and information acquisition channels.
• The grounds for treating the additional indictment of the accused Tamaki Nakano as an achievement of the company or Mr. Watanabe personally.
• The sales, profits, corporate value, and shareholder value gained by the company through these retaliation plans.

If it is a company pledge, please explain it at the shareholders' meeting and the earnings briefing. If it is not a company pledge, the board of directors must publicly deny what Mr. Watanabe was reporting to the company's executive team.

If the representative director repeatedly declares violent retaliation that is not company policy, and no one stops them even after they report to the executive team that it has been carried out, then the silence of the board of directors itself becomes company policy.

Records of "mechanisms" that managers and employees must maintain

It is important that managers and employees who have received instructions regarding this matter independently record what they have seen and heard, rather than aligning their accounts with those of others.

Rather than altering company originals or removing them without authorization, please organize the existence, storage location, date and time, instructor, participants, and processing details of the following records to the extent that you can legitimately verify them yourself.

• The meeting notice, calendar invite, agenda, participants, and minutes of the meeting where it was stated that "it has already been set in motion."
• Memos, audio recordings, chats, emails, work devices, and post-meeting reports documenting statements made by Mr. Makoto Watanabe.
• Internal materials and creation history regarding labor unions, target companies, target individuals, Defendant Toshiaki Nakano, and investors.
• Records of meetings, phone calls, emails, and provision of materials with the National Tax Agency, public prosecutors' offices, police, financial authorities, stock exchanges, news media, and others.
• Contracts, invoices, and deliverables with external contractors such as lawyers, research companies, crisis management companies, and public relations firms.
• Records of contact, meetings, remittances, dining, travel, and accompaniment with individuals identified as anti-social forces or their associates.
• Working hours, business trips, transportation, accommodation, dining, communication, and other expenses used for retaliatory cases.
• Record of sharing investigative information internally, such as upcoming additional indictments, scheduled arrests, target names, and asset seizures, prior to the official announcement.
• Records of executives or employees refusing to participate in retaliation, voicing concerns, and requesting confirmation of legality.
• Transfer, demotion, change in evaluation, request for resignation, or any other disadvantageous treatment against a person who has refused or raised an issue.
• Data deletion, explanation changes, meeting minutes revisions, testimony coordination, and contact among related parties after this matter came to light.
• The account title, department, project, cost, and approver for which the retaliation expense was recorded.

The excuse "my boss told me to" is important, but without an objective record, there is a risk that everything will later be blamed on the person in charge acting on their own authority.

Do not lump together as the same "parties involved" the person who opposed it to protect the company and the person who designed and ordered the retaliation.

Open Letter to Makoto Watanabe, the Board of Directors, the National Tax Agency, and the Public Prosecutors Office

Open Questions to Mr. Makoto Watanabe

1. Did you state in a meeting of executives of a certain rank or higher that "things are already in motion" regarding the labor union and the company and individuals who have previously made statements such as "crush them," "kill them," or "delist the company"?
2. Please clarify the labor union, company, and individuals targeted by the setup.
3. Specifically, what action, request, report, investigation, lawsuit, public relations, or contact does "trap" refer to?
4. Have you hired a revenge agency, detective agency, crisis management company, antisocial forces, or any related parties?
5. Did you provide materials regarding the labor union, target company, or target person to the National Tax Agency, public prosecutors office, police, or other investigative agencies?
6. If provided, please clarify the date of provision, recipient, person in charge, document name, description, and the internal approver.
7. Did you explain the additional indictment of Defendant Tatsuki Nakano to the senior management as a result that you "orchestrated"?
8. Did you know the policy or result of the additional prosecution before the official announcement? If you knew, who told you and when?
9. Did you participate in the plan to simultaneously target investors and shareholders of Company N for arrest and seize their assets?
10. Did you mobilize Last One Mile Co., Ltd.'s directors, executive officers, management, employees, or secretarial functions for the "trap" in this case?
11. How much did you spend on company expenses, company devices, meeting rooms, business trips, business dinners, outsourcing costs, and working hours?
12. Are you calculating the direct costs, indirect costs, and impact on operating profit required for the retaliation?
13. Did you receive formal approval for this retaliation from the Board of Directors or any other corporate body?
14. Have you subjected any officers or employees who refused to participate in this matter to unfavorable personnel measures, intimidation, or demands for resignation?
15. Will all records of meetings, communications, expenses, contacts with authorities, and external contractors regarding this matter be submitted to the independent third-party investigation?

Open Questions to the Board of Directors, Audit and Supervisory Committee, and Executive Management of Lastonemile Inc.

1. Do you know the fact that Makoto Watanabe stated, "It has already been set up"?
2. Please clarify the name of the meeting where the statement was made, the date of the meeting, the attendees, the agenda, and the minutes.
3. What did Mr. Watanabe report on the spot as the result of the "gimmick"?
4. Was there an explanation regarding the additional indictment of Defendant Tamaki Nakano, the plan to request arrest warrants for investors and others, and the pursuit of assets?
5. Did you approve retaliation against the labor union, target company, or target person as a company business or management policy?
6. Have you investigated the company expenses, personnel, working hours, and outsourcing costs used for the retaliatory actions?
7. Have you calculated the impact of the retaliation on operating income, turnover rate, recruitment, transactions, lawsuits, and the company's reputation?
8. Are there any board resolutions, internal approval documents, budgets, contracts, and expense reports related to this matter?
9. Did you exclude Mr. Watanabe from the selection of the investigative contractor, access to evidence, interviews with relevant parties, and approval of the investigation results?
10. Have you taken measures to protect officers and employees who plead, "I no longer want to be complicit in threats"?
11. Do you explicitly state that you will not subject individuals who refused to participate in this matter to transfer, demotion, performance evaluation changes, dismissal, or any other unfavorable treatment?
12. Will you report this matter to the Tokyo Stock Exchange, the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission, the accounting auditor, major shareholders, and partner financial institutions?
13. Will you formally deliberate on Mr. Watanabe's suitability as Representative Chairman and CEO, and measures including his dismissal?

Public questionnaire to the relevant National Tax Agency and Prosecutors Office

1. Did you receive materials regarding the labor union, the target company, the target individuals, Defendant Kakki Nakano, or investors of Company N from Mr. Makoto Watanabe, Last One Mile Inc., or any related parties of the company?
2. When it was provided, did you understand Mr. Watanabe and others' private conflict, statements about murder, company destruction, and delisting, as well as the purpose of eliminating the labor union?
3. Have you cross-checked the explanation provided by Mr. Watanabe and others against opposing materials, objective records, and the subject's own explanation?
4. Regarding the additional indictment of defendant Toshiyoshi Nakano, did Mr. Watanabe or individuals related to Last One Mile Inc. provide information that could be known before the official announcement?
5. Are you investigating the route through which the plan to request arrest warrants for the 40 investors and shareholders of Company N and the names of the targets were leaked to the outside?
6. Have you received requests, lobbying, or provision of materials from Mr. Watanabe or related parties to collectively arrest investors or subject them to asset seizure?
7. In what capacity are you treating Mr. Watanabe: as a suspect, a person of interest, a cooperating witness, an informant, or in some other role?
8. Will you independently verify whether investigative agencies are being used as a means of retaliation by a listed company representative against a labor union and a private company?
9. Do you preserve the records of communications, meetings, receipt of documents, and communication of disposition prospects with Mr. Watanabe, Last One Mile Inc., and related parties?
10. Will you apply the same evidentiary and investigative standards to Mr. Watanabe himself and to the individuals he designated as targets of the investigation?

Measures Sought by the Last Mile Labor Union

1. Last Mile, Inc. must immediately cease all acts of retaliation, intimidation, efforts to identify whistleblowers, and contact with those involved, whether directed at labor unions, the company, or individuals.
2. The Board of Directors shall make the remark "it has already been initiated" and related instructions a formal agenda item and begin fact-finding.
3. Completely exclude Makoto Watanabe from the selection of the contractor for this investigation, evidence management, interviewing related parties, legal evaluation, and approval of the investigation results.
4. Conduct a third-party investigation by attorneys, certified public accountants, labor law experts, and digital forensics experts who are independent of the company.
5. Implement a hold on all records related to meetings, communications, company devices, expenses, ringi (approval requests), contacts with authorities, outsourcing, and investigative information.
6. Calculate the company expenses, labor costs, outsourcing costs, opportunity losses, and impact on operating profit used for retaliation, and disclose them to shareholders.
7. If expenditures unrelated to the company's purpose are identified, demand reimbursement and compensation for damages from Mr. Watanabe and other instructors and beneficiaries.
8. Investigate the materials provided, explanations given, and requests made to the national tax authorities, prosecutors, police, administrative agencies, press, and others.
9. Verify any relationships, contracts, payments, and deliverables involving antisocial groups, revenge-for-hire agencies, investigation firms, and other external actors.
10. Immediately cease interference in the labor union and provide concrete responses to the union's questions and demands for collective bargaining.
11. Prohibit retaliation against executives, employees, whistleblowers, and those who cooperate with investigations who have refused to participate in this matter.
12. Report this matter to the Tokyo Stock Exchange, the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission, accounting auditors, major shareholders, and partner financial institutions.
13. The National Tax Agency and the Public Prosecutors Office must investigate, through a system independent of the relevant departments, whether investigative powers were used for personal retaliation by Mr. Watanabe and others.
14. The Board of Directors shall conduct a fitness review, including the dismissal of Makoto Watanabe as Representative Director.
15. Disclose the investigation results, involved parties, expenses incurred, contacts with authorities, company damages, refund amount, executive disciplinary actions, and recurrence prevention measures to employees, shareholders, business partners, and the market.

Before you proudly boast that "it's already in motion," please show me the ledger and the minutes.

There are only two ways out of this problem.

If in reality nothing was planned at all, it means that Mr. Makoto Watanabe spent many years repeatedly saying "we'll crush you," "we'll kill you," and "we'll have you delisted," and in the end reported fictitious results to the executive management. It is truly an "all-talk-no-action scam."

If they were truly plotting it, it would mean that the Representative Director, Chairman, and CEO used the positions, employees, funds, credibility, and external connections of Last One Mile Inc. to carry out systematic retaliation against a labor union, a private company, and individuals.

And if those results are the additional indictment of Defendant Toshiyuki Nakano, the plan to request arrest warrants for 40 investors, and the pursuit of assets, the issue goes beyond just the internal controls of Last One Mile Inc.

This is an issue concerning the independence of state power, questioning whether the national tax authority and the prosecutors were used as an external hit squad to attack Mr. Watanabe's personal enemies.

The executives and employees of Last One Mile Co., Ltd. have no obligation to participate in Mr. Watanabe's revenge. Working for the company and attacking the representative's enemies are not the same thing.

If murder, delisting, union busting, and arresting everyone are company tasks, please explain the responsible parties, budget, results, impact on operating profit, and legal basis at the shareholders' meeting.

If this is not a company task, the board of directors should immediately disavow Mr. Watanabe's statements and actions, halt the retaliation, and protect the officers and employees involved.

Before boasting that you have "already set things in motion," please explain with account books and minutes what you set in motion, against whom, and for how much, and how much you cut into the operating profit of Last One Mile Inc.