Core Viewpoint - The company, Huakong Saige (000068.SZ), currently does not have any venture capital-related business activities [1] Company Summary - Huakong Saige has confirmed through its interactive platform that it is not engaged in any venture capital operations at this time [1]

Core Viewpoint - The company, Huakong Saige (000068.SZ), currently does not have any venture capital-related business activities [1]. Company Information - On October 23, the company responded to an inquiry on the investor interaction platform regarding its involvement in venture capital [1].

关于持股5%以上股东减持股份触及1%整数倍的 公告 股东深圳赛格股份有限公司保证向本公司提供的信息内容真实、准确和完 整，没有虚假记载、误导性陈述或者重大遗漏。 证券代码：000068 证券简称：华控赛格 公告编号：2025-54 深圳华控赛格股份有限公司 | 本次权益变动方式（可多 | | 通过证券交易所的集中交易 ☑ | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 选） | | 通过证券交易所的大宗交易 | | □ | | | | 其他 | | □（请注明） | | 3.本次变动前后，股东及其一致行动人拥有上市公司权益股份情况 | | | | | | | | 本次变动前持有股份 | | 本次变动后持有股份 | | 名称 | 股份性质 | 股数（股） | 占总股本比 | 占总股本比 股数（股） | | | | | 例（%） | 例（%） | | 合计持有股份 | | 142,792,846 | 14.18% | 137,056,446 13.61% | | 深圳赛格 股份有限 | 其中：无限售 条件股份 | 142,792,846 | 14.18% | 137,056,446 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court of China has rejected the retrial application from Tongfang Investment Co., Ltd., which sought to overturn previous civil judgments against it, affirming the lower court's decisions and indicating that the case will not impact the company's current or future profits [2][3][15]. Group 1: Case Background - The case involves a dispute between Shenzhen Huakong Saige Co., Ltd. and Tongfang Investment Co., Ltd. regarding the ownership of 40.5% shares in Tongfang Environment Co., Ltd. [4][10]. - The initial judgment from the Weifang Intermediate People's Court ruled in favor of Tongfang Investment, which led to further arbitration requests and appeals [4][5]. - The Supreme People's Court's decision to dismiss the retrial application confirms the validity of the previous judgments and the handling of the share ownership dispute [5][14]. Group 2: Financial Implications - The Supreme Court's ruling will not affect the company's profits for the current or future periods, as the company has already accounted for the relevant share ownership in its financial statements [3][15]. - The company has executed the second-instance judgment from the Shandong High Court and has processed the accounting for the 20.25% stake in Tongfang Environment Co., Ltd. accordingly [3][15]. Group 3: Legal Proceedings - The legal proceedings included multiple stages, with the initial judgment, subsequent appeals, and arbitration requests leading to the final ruling by the Supreme People's Court [4][10][12]. - The court found that the original judgment regarding the distribution of shares was appropriate, as both parties were deemed equally responsible for the invalidity of the underlying agreements [11][12][13].

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court has rejected the retrial application from Tongfang Investment Co., marking the end of the share dispute litigation between Huakong Saige and Tongfang Investment [1] Case Review - The dispute originated from a series of agreements between Tongfang Investment and Huakong Saige regarding the purchase of shares. In January 2017, Tongfang Investment entrusted Huakong with 432.3456 million yuan for investment, with the promise that the funds would be used to acquire 40.5% of Tongfang Environment's shares. In July 2020, Tongfang Investment applied for arbitration, and in April 2022, the Beijing Arbitration Commission ruled that Huakong Saige should pay Tongfang Investment 216.1728 million yuan. Subsequently, the 40.5% shares were transferred to Tongfang Investment, and after fulfilling the arbitration ruling, Huakong Saige filed a lawsuit to claim 20.25% of the shares and corresponding benefits from Tongfang Investment [2] Retrial Application Reasons and Court's Viewpoint - Tongfang Investment's retrial application included several reasons, such as the claim that the second-instance court erred in not suspending the trial during the arbitration process, and that the original judgment misinterpreted the arbitration ruling. The Supreme People's Court found that the second-instance court's actions were appropriate and that the original judgment regarding share distribution was consistent with the arbitration ruling. Therefore, the retrial application was rejected [3] Impact on the Company - The Supreme People's Court's ruling will not affect the current or future profits of Huakong Saige. For the year 2024, the company has applied for execution based on the second-instance ruling and has accounted for the involved 20.25% shares of Tongfang Environment accordingly. As of the announcement date, the company and its subsidiaries do not have any other significant undisclosed litigation or arbitration matters [4]

特别提示： 股票代码：000068 股票简称：华控赛格 公告编号：2025-53 深圳华控赛格股份有限公司 关于同方投资提起再审进展暨收到《民事裁定书》的 公告 本公司及董事会全体成员保证信息披露的内容真实、准确和完整，没有虚假 记载、误导性陈述或者重大遗漏。 1.案件所处的诉讼阶段：再审裁定驳回申请人再审申请； 2.上市公司所处的当事人地位：再审被申请人； 3.再审事项进展：同方投资有限公司（以下简称"同方投资"）因不服〔2024〕 鲁民终 645 号民事判决书，向中华人民共和国最高人民法院（以下简称"最高人 民法院"）申请再审，请求撤销山东高院（2024）鲁民终 645 号民事判决书、山 东潍坊中院（2023）鲁 07 民初 100 号民事判决及之三民事裁定，改判驳回华控 赛格对同方投资提出的全部诉讼请求，支持同方投资对华控赛格所提全部反诉请 求，并由公司承担本案一、二审诉讼费用；现最高人民法院已出具《民事裁定书》， 裁定驳回同方投资的再审申请。 4.对上市公司的影响：本次最高人民法院的裁定结果不会对公司本期或期后 利润产生影响。2024 年度，公司已按照山东省高院二审判决结果申请执行，并 将涉案标的同方 ...

Group 1 - The core issue involves a construction contract dispute where Huakong Saige's subsidiary, Tangshan Huakong Environmental Investment Co., Ltd., has filed a counterclaim against a party for breach of contract due to delays in the construction schedule [1] - The company is seeking a total of 50.4235 million yuan in damages for the delay, which includes penalties and requests for the completion of unfinished work and provision of acceptance documents [1] - The case has been accepted by the Tangshan Intermediate People's Court and is currently in the first instance stage [1]

Core Viewpoint - The company is currently involved in a legal dispute with Chengdu Construction Group Co., Ltd. regarding a construction contract, with a counterclaim amounting to approximately 50.42 million yuan [2][6][15]. Group 1: Case Background - The case is at the first-instance counterclaim stage, with the company's subsidiary, Qian'an Huakong Environmental Investment Co., Ltd., as the counterclaimant and Chengdu Construction as the counter-defendant [2]. - The lawsuit arises from a construction contract signed on May 24, 2017, with a planned completion date of December 2, 2017, which has not been met due to alleged delays by Chengdu Construction [8][12]. Group 2: Progress of the Lawsuit - Qian'an Huakong submitted a civil counterclaim to the Tangshan Intermediate People's Court, which was accepted on September 26, 2025 [3]. Group 3: Counterclaim Details - The counterclaim requests the following: 1. Payment of 36.5 million yuan for delay penalties [6]. 2. Compensation of 10.11 million yuan for government service fee losses [6]. 3. Payment of 527,000 yuan for additional supervision fees [7]. 4. Compensation of 170,885 yuan for office rental losses [7]. 5. Payment of 3.11 million yuan for personnel salary losses [7]. 6. Completion of all unfinished works under the construction contract [7]. 7. Provision of all necessary materials for project completion [7]. 8. Coverage of litigation costs [7]. Group 4: Reasons for the Counterclaim - Chengdu Construction is accused of severe delays, with the project being over seven years behind schedule due to inadequate construction organization and quality issues [8][9]. - The failure to complete the project has resulted in significant financial losses for Qian'an Huakong, including the inability to collect service fees due to non-completion of government assessments [9][10]. - Additional costs incurred due to extended supervision and office rental are attributed to Chengdu Construction's delays [11][12]. Group 5: Other Legal Matters - As of the announcement date, the company and its subsidiaries do not have any other undisclosed significant litigation or arbitration matters [15].

股票代码：000068 股票简称：华控赛格 公告编号：2025-52 深圳华控赛格股份有限公司 关于控股子公司迁安华控诉讼进展暨提起反诉的公告 本公司及董事会全体成员保证信息披露的内容真实、准确和完整，没有虚假 记载、误导性陈述或者重大遗漏。 特别提示： 1.案件所处的诉讼阶段：一审反诉阶段； 2.上市公司子公司所处的当事人地位：控股子公司迁安市华控环境投资有限 责任公司（以下简称"迁安华控"）为反诉原告；成都建工集团有限公司（以下 简称"成都建工"）为反诉被告； 3.涉案金额：暂计 50,423,542 元； 4.对上市公司的影响：目前案件尚未开庭，反诉事项对公司本期利润或期后 利润的具体影响尚存在不确定性。 一、案件基本情况 2025年7月28日，公司控股子公司迁安华控收到河北省唐山市中级人民法院 （以下简称"唐山市中院"）发送的《民事诉状》等法律文书。成都建工就与公 司控股子公司迁安华控签订的《河北省建设工程施工合同》（以下简称"施工合 同"）所产生的纠纷问题，向唐山市中院提起诉讼。有关本案的详细情况详见公 司于2025年7月30日在指定信息披露媒体发布的《关于控股子公司迁安华控收到 〈民事诉状〉的公告 ...

Group 1 - The company Huakong Saige announced on September 23 that its eighth board's sixteenth temporary meeting was held via communication voting [1] - The meeting reviewed documents including a proposal for the company to apply for loans from financial institutions [1] Group 2 - A national organized large-scale procurement has drawn significant attention from the entire industry due to low bidding prices being strictly monitored [1] - Companies participating in the bidding are required to provide clear explanations for their pricing strategies [1]