Regarding the sexual harassment allegations against Director Ito and the failure to disclose management governance-related information and criminal cases involving Chairman Watanabe, we have sent the following public question letter.
Last1Mile Inc.
President and CEO Mr. Watanabe Makoto
To the Board of Directors and Audit & Supervisory Committee
[Public Questioning Document] On the sexual harassment allegations against Director Ito and the failure to disclose information related to corporate governance and criminal cases centered on Chairman Watanabe
The union has already protested as a serious human rights violation the repeated pinching of the buttocks by Director Ito towards male employees, the resulting development of ED and adjustment disorder, and the relocation issue.
But is this a case where it ends with just one director engaging in sexual harassment?
Director Ito is said to be a person close to Chairman Watanabe from his title. It has also been reported that documents have been submitted by the labor union regarding the suspicion of violating the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act against Mr. Watanabe, and that he was dismissed from the charges without indictment on June 12, 2026.
Furthermore, there are reports that Watanabe is openly bragging to those around him that he is an accomplice in the tax evasion case involving the former director of the company; that several executives and directors who are implicated in the alleged scheme are still in office; and that the former head of the listed company was investigated and is still under investigation.
Given that there are multiple serious doubts regarding the management of listed companies, have you properly investigated the facts and determined whether or not to provide explanations or disclose information to investors?
The union requests a clear response regarding the following:
Regarding the indictment and non-indictment of Mr. Watanabe Seito, when did the Board of Directors become aware of this matter and what investigation and disclosure decisions were made? If it was decided not to disclose the information, please explain the specific grounds for that decision.
2. Is it true that Mr. Watanabe referred to the former director of your company as an accomplice in a tax evasion case? Did you confirm the facts and verify the appropriateness of that statement as a company?
3. To what extent did the company investigate and consider the need to disclose the whereabouts of the executives alleged to be involved in the tax evasion case, the existence of any searches conducted against the then Chief Executive Officer, and the investigative information the company has regarding the matter?
4. What kind of command and control relationship or personnel relationship does Director Ito have with Mr. Watanabe? Was there any instruction, approval, or involvement by Mr. Watanabe or his immediate subordinates in the actions and reassignment of this male employee?
5. Has an independent investigation confirmed that there is no connection between the allegations of sexual harassment by Director Ito and the information related to these criminal cases, including any retaliation against personnel, information management, or handling of internal reports?
There is no reason why such serious doubts about so many management figures should not be investigated and even whether they should be disclosed should be considered.
"The chairman is under suspicion of filing documents to incriminate himself; former directors and executives are suspected of involvement in tax evasion; and a close associate is accused of sexual harassment. And a male employee who has filed a complaint is being transferred."
Will your company simply dismiss this series of problems as the concerns of unrelated individuals?
The union has once again requested the cooperation of Director Ito in filing a workers’ compensation claim regarding his actions, and is considering pursuing legal action including criminal charges for injury to property.
In addition, we request that Mr. Watanabe and Director Ito conduct an independent investigation into the facts, review the records of the Board of Directors’ and Audit & Supervisory Committee’s proceedings, and explain the reasoning behind their decision regarding whether to provide timely disclosure.
What listed companies need is not silence to protect their management teams; it is a willingness to investigate the facts, reveal the responsibilities, and explain the necessary information to the market.
Now that the eyes of Director Ito are being directed at this matter, the union asks: Where exactly is the company’s board of directors looking while managing the business?