Asset Management One Co.., Ltd..

Includes form instructions and options. Options shown in this text do not identify which boxes were selected.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
This Disclosure Reporting Page (DRP ADV) is an 
INITIAL OR
AMENDED response used to report details for affirmative responses to Items 11.C., 11.D.,
11.E., 11.F. or 11.G. of Form ADV.
Regulatory Action
Check item(s) being responded to:
11.C(1)
11.C(2)
11.C(3)
11.C(4)
11.C(5)
11.D(1)
11.D(2)
11.D(3)
11.D(4)
11.D(5)
11.E(1)
11.E(2)
11.E(3)
11.E(4)
11.F.
11.G.
Use a separate DRP for each event or proceeding . The same event or proceeding may be reported for more than one person or entity using one DRP. File
with a completed Execution Page. 
One event may result in more than one affirmative answer to Items 11.C., 11.D., 11.E., 11.F. or 11.G. Use only one DRP to report details related to the
same event. If an event gives rise to actions by more than one regulator, provide details for each action on a separate DRP.
PART I
A.  The person(s) or entity(ies) for whom this DRP is being filed is (are):
You (the advisory firm)
You and one or more of your advisory affiliates
One or more of your advisory affiliates
If this DRP is being filed for an advisory affiliate, give the full name of the advisory affiliate below (for individuals, Last name, First name, Middle name). 
If the advisory affiliate has a CRD number, provide that number. If not, indicate "non-registered" by checking the appropriate box.
ADV DRP - ADVISORY AFFILIATE
CRD
Number:
This advisory affiliate is 
a Firm
an Individual
Registered:
Yes
No
Name:
MIZUHO FINANCIAL GROUP,

INC.
(For individuals, Last, First,
Middle)
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because the advisory affiliate(s) is no longer associated with the adviser.
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because: (1) the event or proceeding occurred more than ten years ago or (2) the adviser is
registered or applying for registration with the SEC or reporting as an exempt reporting adviser with the SEC and the event was resolved in the
adviser's or advisory affiliate's favor.
If you are registered or registering with a state securities authority , you may remove a DRP for an event you reported only in response to Item
11.D(4), and only if that event occurred more than ten years ago. If you are registered or registering with the SEC, you may remove a DRP for any
event listed in Item 11 that occurred more than ten years ago.
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because it was filed in error, such as due to a clerical or data-entry mistake. Explain the
circumstances: 
B.
If the advisory affiliate is registered through the IARD system or CRD system, has the advisory affiliate submitted a DRP (with Form ADV, BD or U-4) to
the IARD or CRD for the event? If the answer is "Yes," no other information on this DRP must be provided.
 Yes
 No
NOTE: The completion of this form does not relieve the advisory affiliate of its obligation to update its IARD or CRD records.
PART II
1.  Regulatory Action initiated by:
SEC   
Other Federal   
State   
SRO
Foreign
(Full name of regulator, foreign financial regulatory authority, federal, state, or SRO) 
JAPAN FINANCIAL SERVICES AGENCY
2.
Principal Sanction:
Other
Other Sanctions: 
BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT ORDER
3.
Date Initiated (MM/DD/YYYY): 
09/22/2021
 Exact
 Explanation
If not exact, provide explanation:
4.
Docket/Case Number:
N/A
5.
Advisory Affiliate Employing Firm when activity occurred which led to the regulatory action (if applicable):
N/A
6.
Principal Product Type:
Banking Products (Other than CD(s))
Other Product Types: 
7.
Describe the allegations related to this regulatory action (your response must fit within the space provided):
MIZUHO FINANCIAL GROUP INC. (THE "ADVISORY AFFILIATE")'S BANKING SUBSIDIARY, MIZUHO BANK, LTD. ("MIZUHO BANK") HAD SEVERAL SYSTEM
FAILURES IN 2021 WHICH CAUSED SIGNIFICANT INFLUENCES ON ITS CUSTOMERS. IN THE MEANTIME, MIZUHO BANK PLANS TO RENEW AND UPDATE
ITS SYSTEMS NECESSARY FOR BUSINESS CONTINUITY (THE "SYSTEM RENEWAL PLAN"). IN CONNECTION WITH THE ABOVE, THE FSA ISSUED A
BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT ORDER TO MIZUHO BANK AND THE ADVISORY AFFILIATE THEREBY ORDERING MIZUHO BANK (1) TO REEXAMINE AND REVIEW
THE SYSTEM RENEWAL PLAN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE PAST SYSTEM FAILURES, THE NECESSITY AND URGENCY OF THE SYSTEM RENEWAL PLAN, AND
POSSIBLE RISKS TO THE BANKING BUSINESS, (2) TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE CONTROLS BE PLACED IN CONNECTION WITH THE SYSTEM RENEWAL PLAN
AND (3) TO SUBMIT THE RESULTS OF (1) AND (2) ABOVE. THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT PLAN ALSO ORDERED THE ADVISORY AFFILIATE, AS A BANK
HOLDING COMPANY OF MIZUHO BANK, TO VERIFY THE RESULTS OF MIZUHO BANK'S REEXAMINATION AND REVIEW OF THE SYSTEM RENEWAL PLAN AS
WELL AS A PLAN FOR APPROPRIATE CONTROLS, AND TO SUBMIT THE RESULTS OF SUCH VERIFICATION BY OCTOBER 29, 2021.
8.
Current Status?      
 Pending
 On Appeal
 Final
9.
If on appeal, regulatory action appealed to (SEC, SRO, Federal or State Court) and Date Appeal Filed:
If Final or On Appeal, complete all items below. For Pending Actions, complete Item 13 only.
10. How was matter resolved:
Other

11. Resolution Date (MM/DD/YYYY):
10/29/2021
 Exact
 Explanation
If not exact, provide explanation:
12. Resolution Detail:
A.  Were any of the following Sanctions Ordered (check all appropriate items)?
 Monetary/Fine Amount: $
 Revocation/Expulsion/Denial
 Disgorgement/Restitution
 Censure
 Cease and Desist/Injunction
 Bar
 Suspension
B.
Other Sanctions Ordered:
AS STATED ABOVE, THE ADVISORY AFFILIATE HAS BEEN ORDERED TO VERIFY ITS BANKING SUBSIDIARY'S SYSTEM RENEWAL PLAN AND CONTROLS
AND TO SUBMIT THE RESULTS TO THE FSA BY OCTOBER 29, 2021.
Sanction detail: if suspended, enjoined or barred, provide duration including start date and capacities affected (General Securities Principal,
Financial Operations Principal, etc.). If requalification by exam/retraining was a condition of the sanction, provide length of time given to
requalify/retrain, type of exam required and whether condition has been satisfied. If disposition resulted in a fine, penalty, restitution,
disgorgement or monetary compensation, provide total amount, portion levied against you or an advisory affiliate, date paid and if any portion
of penalty was waived: 
SAME AS ABOVE.
13. Provide a brief summary of details related to the action status and (or) disposition and include relevant terms, conditions and dates (your response
must fit within the space provided).
THE ADVISORY AFFILIATE IS IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING AND VERIFYING MIZUHO BANK'S SYSTEM RENEWAL PLAN AND MANAGEMENT CONTROLS,
AND PREPARING THE VERIFICATION RESULTS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE FSA.

Includes form instructions and options. Options shown in this text do not identify which boxes were selected.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
This Disclosure Reporting Page (DRP ADV) is an 
INITIAL OR
AMENDED response used to report details for affirmative responses to Items 11.C., 11.D.,
11.E., 11.F. or 11.G. of Form ADV.
Regulatory Action
Check item(s) being responded to:
11.C(1)
11.C(2)
11.C(3)
11.C(4)
11.C(5)
11.D(1)
11.D(2)
11.D(3)
11.D(4)
11.D(5)
11.E(1)
11.E(2)
11.E(3)
11.E(4)
11.F.
11.G.
Use a separate DRP for each event or proceeding . The same event or proceeding may be reported for more than one person or entity using one DRP. File
with a completed Execution Page. 
One event may result in more than one affirmative answer to Items 11.C., 11.D., 11.E., 11.F. or 11.G. Use only one DRP to report details related to the
same event. If an event gives rise to actions by more than one regulator, provide details for each action on a separate DRP.
PART I
A.  The person(s) or entity(ies) for whom this DRP is being filed is (are):
You (the advisory firm)
You and one or more of your advisory affiliates
One or more of your advisory affiliates
If this DRP is being filed for an advisory affiliate, give the full name of the advisory affiliate below (for individuals, Last name, First name, Middle name). 
If the advisory affiliate has a CRD number, provide that number. If not, indicate "non-registered" by checking the appropriate box.
ADV DRP - ADVISORY AFFILIATE
CRD
Number:
This advisory affiliate is 
a Firm
an Individual
Registered:
Yes
No
Name:
MIZUHO FINANCIAL GROUP,
INC.
(For individuals, Last, First,
Middle)

This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because the advisory affiliate(s) is no longer associated with the adviser.
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because: (1) the event or proceeding occurred more than ten years ago or (2) the adviser is
registered or applying for registration with the SEC or reporting as an exempt reporting adviser with the SEC and the event was resolved in the
adviser's or advisory affiliate's favor.
If you are registered or registering with a state securities authority , you may remove a DRP for an event you reported only in response to Item
11.D(4), and only if that event occurred more than ten years ago. If you are registered or registering with the SEC, you may remove a DRP for any
event listed in Item 11 that occurred more than ten years ago.
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because it was filed in error, such as due to a clerical or data-entry mistake. Explain the
circumstances: 
B.
If the advisory affiliate is registered through the IARD system or CRD system, has the advisory affiliate submitted a DRP (with Form ADV, BD or U-4) to
the IARD or CRD for the event? If the answer is "Yes," no other information on this DRP must be provided.
 Yes
 No
NOTE: The completion of this form does not relieve the advisory affiliate of its obligation to update its IARD or CRD records.
PART II
1.  Regulatory Action initiated by:
SEC   
Other Federal   
State   
SRO
Foreign
(Full name of regulator, foreign financial regulatory authority, federal, state, or SRO) 
JAPAN FINANCIAL SERVICES AGENCY ("FSA")
2.
Principal Sanction:
Other
Other Sanctions: 
BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT ORDER
3.
Date Initiated (MM/DD/YYYY): 
11/26/2021
 Exact
 Explanation
If not exact, provide explanation:
4.
Docket/Case Number:
N/A
5.
Advisory Affiliate Employing Firm when activity occurred which led to the regulatory action (if applicable):
N/A
6.
Principal Product Type:
Banking Products (Other than CD(s))
Other Product Types: 
7.
Describe the allegations related to this regulatory action (your response must fit within the space provided):
THE REGULATORY ACTION IS DIRECTED TO MIZUHO BANK LTD. ("MIZUHO BANK") AND ITS PARENT COMPANY, MIZUHO FINANCIAL GROUP INC. (THE
"MHFG"). MIZUHO BANK CAUSED SYSTEM FAILURES EIGHT TIMES IN TOTAL DURING THE PERIOD FROM FEBRUARY TO SEPTEMBER 2021, WHICH
SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECTED ITS INDIVIDUAL AND CORPORATE CUSTOMERS. FURTHERMORE, IN THE RESTORATION PROCESS AFTER THE SYSTEM FAILURE
ON SEPTEMBER 30, A PROBLEM WAS FOUND IN RELATION TO MIZUHO BANK'S COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO ASSET
FREEZING AND OTHER ECONOMIC SANCTIONS AS WELL AS THE AML/CFT GUIDELINES. THE FSA FOUND THAT THE DIRECT CAUSE OF THE SERIES OF
MULTIPLE SYSTEM FAILURES AS FOLLOWS: ·MIZUHO BANK HAS FAILED TO CONDUCT VERIFICATION SUFFICIENTLY FOR ENSURING QUALITY IN SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT AND RESPONSES TO FAILURES. ·MIZUHO BANK HAS NOT DEVELOPED A MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION STRUCTURE TO ENSURE STABLE
OPERATION OF ITS NEW CORE SYSTEM, SUCH AS FAILING TO CORRECT PROBLEMS IN SYSTEM MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION AND TO GOVERN
OUTSOURCEES SUFFICIENTLY. ·MIZUHO BANK HAS FAILED TO VERIFY ITS PREPAREDNESS FOR EMERGENCIES SUFFICIENTLY THROUGH DRILLS AND
TRAINING. THE FSA FURTHER FOUND THAT MHFG FAILED TO MANAGE AND CONTROL MIZUHO BANK APPROPRIATELY AS A BANK HOLDING COMPANY AND
IDENTIFIED MHFG'S GOVERNANCE RELATED ISSUES. THE FSA CONSIDERS THAT THE ROOT CAUSES OF THESE PROBLEMS IN TERMS OF SYSTEMS AND
GOVERNANCE ARE AS FOLLOWS: (1)DISREGARD FOR SYSTEM-RELATED RISKS AND EXPERTISE (2)DISREGARD FOR THE ACTUAL SITUATION OF THE IT
SECTION (3)LACK OF SENSITIVITY TO THE IMPACT ON CUSTOMERS AND DISREGARD FOR THE ACTUAL SITUATION OF THE SALES SECTION (4)ATTITUDE
TO REFRAIN FROM SAYING WHAT NEEDS TO BE SAID AND TO ONLY DO WHAT WAS INSTRUCTED ACCORDINGLY, THE FSA HAS ORDERED MIZUHO BANK
AND MHFG TO FORMULATE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT PLANS AS FURTHER DESCRIBED IN 12.B BELOW.
8.
Current Status?      
 Pending
 On Appeal
 Final
9.
If on appeal, regulatory action appealed to (SEC, SRO, Federal or State Court) and Date Appeal Filed:
N/A
If Final or On Appeal, complete all items below. For Pending Actions, complete Item 13 only.

10. How was matter resolved:
Order
11. Resolution Date (MM/DD/YYYY):
03/31/2022
 Exact
 Explanation
If not exact, provide explanation:
12. Resolution Detail:
A.  Were any of the following Sanctions Ordered (check all appropriate items)?
 Monetary/Fine Amount: $
 Revocation/Expulsion/Denial
 Disgorgement/Restitution
 Censure
 Cease and Desist/Injunction
 Bar
 Suspension
B.
Other Sanctions Ordered:
IN CONNECTION WITH MULTIPLE SYSTEM FAILURES CAUSED BY THE BANK, THE FSA ISSUED A BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT ORDER TO MIZUHO BANK
AND MHFG. SPECIFICALLY, MHFG, AN ADVISORY AFFILIATE OF ASSET MANAGEMENT ONE, HAS BEEN ORDERED TO: 1. PROMPTLY IMPLEMENT THE
MEASURES MHFG HAS FORMULATED TO PREVENT RECURRENCE OF SYSTEM FAILURES. 2. FORMULATE A BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT PLAN
REGARDING THE FOLLOWING MATTERS AS A BANK HOLDING COMPANY (INCLUDING EXAMINATION AND NECESSARY REVIEW OF THE BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT PLAN FORMULATED BY MIZUHO BANK) AND PROMPTLY IMPLEMENT THE PLAN. ADDITIONALLY, REEXAMINE AND REVIEW THE PLAN
ON AN ONGOING BASIS. (1) MEASURES FOR PREVENTING RECURRENCE OF SYSTEM FAILURES THAT INCORPORATE NECESSARY MEASURES
ASCERTAINED THROUGH REEXAMINATION AND REVIEW OF THE CURRENT MEASURES (2) SPECIFIC INITIATIVES FOR DEVELOPING A GOVERNANCE
FRAMEWORK NECESSARY FOR ENSURING STABLE SYSTEM OPERATION (3) SPECIFIC INITIATIVES FOR IMPROVING BUSINESS, ADDRESSING THE
ROOT CAUSES OF THE SYSTEM FAILURES AS DESCRIBED IN THE ROOT CAUSES IDENTIFIED BY THE FSA. 3. REPORT ABOUT THE CLARIFICATION OF
MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES AT MHFG BASED ON THE CAUSES OF THE SYSTEM FAILURES. 4. SUBMIT THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT PLAN
MENTIONED IN 2. ABOVE AND THE REPORT MENTIONED IN 3. ABOVE, TOGETHER WITH A REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION STATUS OF THE
RECURRENCE PREVENTION MEASURES MENTIONED IN 1. ABOVE AS OF THE END OF DECEMBER 2021 BY MONDAY, JANUARY 17, 2022. 5. COMPILE
THE IMPLEMENTATION STATUS OF THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT PLAN MENTIONED IN 2. ABOVE (INCLUDING THE RESULTS OF THE
REEXAMINATION AND REVIEW OF THE PLAN) AS OF THE END OF MARCH 2022 AS THE FIRST REPORT, AND FOR EVERY THREE MONTHS
THEREAFTER, AND SUBMIT THE REPORT THUS COMPILED BY THE 15TH OF THE FOLLOWING MONTH.
Sanction detail: if suspended, enjoined or barred, provide duration including start date and capacities affected (General Securities Principal,
Financial Operations Principal, etc.). If requalification by exam/retraining was a condition of the sanction, provide length of time given to
requalify/retrain, type of exam required and whether condition has been satisfied. If disposition resulted in a fine, penalty, restitution,
disgorgement or monetary compensation, provide total amount, portion levied against you or an advisory affiliate, date paid and if any portion
of penalty was waived: 
SEE ABOVE.
13. Provide a brief summary of details related to the action status and (or) disposition and include relevant terms, conditions and dates (your response
must fit within the space provided).
MIZUHO BANK AND MHFG WILL BE TAKING ACTIONS AS DIRECTED IN THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT ORDER AND PROVIDE A BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
PLAN, RELEVANT REPORTS, AND STATUS UPDATES TO THE FSA BY THEIR RESPECTIVE DUE DATES AS SET FORTH IN THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
ORDER.

Includes form instructions and options. Options shown in this text do not identify which boxes were selected.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
This Disclosure Reporting Page (DRP ADV) is an 
INITIAL OR
AMENDED response used to report details for affirmative responses to Item 11.H. of Part
1A or Item 2.F. of Part 1B of Form ADV.
Civil Judicial
Check Part 1A item(s) being responded to:
11.H(1)(a)
11.H(1)(b)
11.H(1)(c)
11.H(2)
Check Part 1B item(s) being responded to:
2.F(1)
2.F(2)
2.F(3)
2.F(4)
2.F(5)
Use a separate DRP for each event or proceeding . The same event or proceeding may be reported for more than one person or entity using one DRP. File
with a completed Execution Page.
One event may result in more than one affirmative answer to Item 11.H. of Part 1A or Item 2.F. of Part 1B. Use only one DRP to report details related to the
same event. Unrelated civil judicial actions must be reported on separate DRPs.
PART I
A.  The person(s) or entity(ies) for whom this DRP is being filed is (are):

You (the advisory firm)
You and one or more of your advisory affiliates
One or more of your advisory affiliates
If this DRP is being filed for an advisory affiliate, give the full name of the advisory affiliate below (for individuals, Last name, First name, Middle name). 
If the advisory affiliate has a CRD number, provide that number. If not, indicate "non-registered" by checking the appropriate box.
ADV DRP - ADVISORY AFFILIATE
No Information Filed
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because the advisory affiliate(s) is no longer associated with the adviser.
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because: (1) the event or proceeding occurred more than ten years ago or (2) the adviser is
registered or applying for registration with the SEC or reporting as an exempt reporting adviser with the SEC and the event was resolved in the
adviser's or advisory affiliate's favor.
If you are registered or registering with a state securities authority , you may remove a DRP for an event you reported only in response to Item 11.H.
(1)(a), and only if that event occurred more than ten years ago. If you are registered or registering with the SEC, you may remove a DRP for any
event listed in Item 11 that occurred more than ten years ago.
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because it was filed in error, such as due to a clerical or data-entry mistake. Explain the
circumstances: 
B.
If the advisory affiliate is registered through the IARD system or CRD system, has the advisory affiliate submitted a DRP (with Form ADV, BD or U-4) to
the IARD or CRD for the event? If the answer is "Yes," no other information on this DRP must be provided.
 Yes
 No
NOTE: The completion of this form does not relieve the advisory affiliate of its obligation to update its IARD or CRD records.
PART II
1.  Court Action initiated by: (Name of regulator, foreign financial regulatory authority, SRO, commodities exchange, agency, firm, private plaintiff, etc.) 
AXA LIFE INSURANCE CO., LTD.
2.
Principal Relief Sought:
Money Damages (Private/Civil Complaint)
Other Relief Sought: 
3.
Filing Date of Court Action (MM/DD/YYYY):
07/31/2013
 Exact
 Explanation
If not exact, provide explanation:
4.
Principal Product Type:
Other
Other Product Types: 
PRIVATELY PLACED INVESTMENT TRUST
5.
Formal Action was brought in (include name of Federal, State or Foreign Court, Location of Court - City or County and State or Country, Docket/Case
Number): 
THE TOKYO DISTRICT COURT
6.
Advisory Affiliate Employing Firm when activity occurred which led to the civil judicial action (if applicable): 
7.
Describe the allegations related to this civil action (your response must fit within the space provided): 
THE PLAINTIFF IS ONE OF THE INVESTORS OF A JAPANESE INVESTMENT TRUST FUND (THE "FUND") WHICH WAS MANAGED BY SHINKO ASSET
MANAGEMENT CO., LTD ("SHINKO", MERGED TO DIAM CO., LTD. AND NAME CHANGED TO ASSET MANAGEMENT ONE CO., LTD. AS OF OCTOBER 1ST,
2016). THE FUND WAS A PRIVATELY PLACED FUND FOR QUALIFIED INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS. SHINKO SOLD EQUITIES IN THE FUND IN ACCORDANCE
WITH REDEMPTION REQUEST FROM THE PLAINTIFF. LATER THE SAME DAY, IT WAS TURNED OUT THAT THE AMOUNT OF REDEMPTION WAS ONE FIGURE
GREATER THAN PLAINTIFF' INTENDED AMOUNT. SHINKO BOUGHT BACK THE EQUITIES BUT A LOSS EVENTUATED TO THE FUND DURING SELLING AND
BUYING. THE PLAINTIFF ALLEGED THAT SHINKO HAS CAUSED A FINANCIAL LOSS TO THE PLAINTIFF.
8.
Current Status? 
 Pending
 On Appeal
 Final
9.
If on appeal, action appealed to (provide name of court) and Date Appeal Filed (MM/DD/YYYY): 
10. If pending, date notice/process was served (MM/DD/YYYY):

 Exact
 Explanation
If not exact, provide explanation:
THE CASE CLOSED
If Final or On Appeal, complete all items below. For Pending Actions, complete Item 14 only.
11. How was matter resolved:
Other
12. Resolution Date (MM/DD/YYYY): 
10/14/2016
 Exact
 Explanation
If not exact, provide explanation:
13. Resolution Detail:
A.  Were any of the following Sanctions Ordered or Relief Granted(check appropriate items)?
Monetary/Fine Amount: $
Revocation/Expulsion/Denial
Disgorgement/Restitution
Censure
Cease and Desist/Injunction
Bar
Suspension
B.
Other Sanctions:
COMPROMISE WHICH WAS MADE AND AUTHORIZED BY THE COURT.
C.
Sanction detail: if suspended, enjoined or barred, provide duration including start date and capacities affected (General Securities Principal,
Financial Operations Principal, etc.). If requalification by exam/retraining was a condition of the sanction, provide length of time given to
requalify/retrain, type of exam required and whether condition has been satisfied. If disposition resulted in a fine, penalty, restitution,
disgorgement, or monetary compensation, provide total amount, portion levied against you or an advisory affiliate, date paid and if any portion
of penalty was waived:
THE COURT CASE BETWEEN THE PLAINTIFF AND SHINKO ASSET MANAGEMENT CO., LTD. (DEFENDANT, WHICH MERGED INTO AM ONE ON
OCTOBER 1, 2016), FILED TO THE TOKYO DISTRICT COURT ON JULY 31, 2013. THE PLAINTIFF IS ONE OF THE INVESTORS OF A JAPANESE
INVESTMENT TRUST FUND (THE "FUND") WHICH WAS MANAGED BY SHINKO ASSET MANAGEMENT CO., LTD. (THE FUND WAS A PRIVATELY PLACED
FUND FOR QUALIFIED INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS.) ON SEPTEMBER 30, 2016, THE COURT HANDED DOWN A JUDGMENT THAT THE DEFENDANT
SHOULD PAY YEN 40 MILLION TO THE PLAINTIFF. SUCH AMOUNT WAS ONLY PART OF THE AMOUNT CLAIMED BY PLAINTIFF, BECAUSE OF
COMPARATIVE FAULT (THE COURT FOUND BOTH PARTY'S NEGLIGENCE.) NEITHER PARTY MADE AN APPEAL AND THE CASE HAVE BEEN CLOSED.
14. Provide a brief summary of circumstances related to the action(s), allegation(s), disposition(s) and/or finding(s) disclosed above (your response must
fit within the space provided). 
THE COURT CASE BETWEEN THE PLAINTIFF AND SHINKO ASSET MANAGEMENT CO., LTD. (DEFENDANT, WHICH MERGED INTO AM ONE ON OCTOBER 1,
2016), FILED TO THE TOKYO DISTRICT COURT ON JULY 31, 2013. THE PLAINTIFF IS ONE OF THE INVESTORS OF A JAPANESE INVESTMENT TRUST FUND
(THE "FUND") WHICH WAS MANAGED BY SHINKO ASSET MANAGEMENT CO., LTD. (THE FUND WAS A PRIVATELY PLACED FUND FOR QUALIFIED
INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS.) ON SEPTEMBER 30, 2016, THE COURT HANDED DOWN A JUDGMENT THAT THE DEFENDANT SHOULD PAY YEN 40 MILLION
TO THE PLAINTIFF. SUCH AMOUNT WAS ONLY PART OF THE AMOUNT CLAIMED BY PLAINTIFF, BECAUSE OF COMPARATIVE FAULT (THE COURT FOUND
BOTH PARTY'S NEGLIGENCE.) NEITHER PARTY MADE AN APPEAL AND THE CASE HAVE BEEN CLOSED.