关于2025年度日常关联交易计划的公告 本公司及董事会全体成员保证信息披露的内容真实、准确、完整，没有虚假 记载、误导性陈述或重大遗漏。 一、日常关联交易基本情况 （一）关联交易概述 1、根据天海融合防务装备技术股份有限公司（以下简称"公司"）的实际情况，并结合 公司业务发展的需要，预计公司及子公司 2025 年将与武汉南华工业设备工程股份有限公司（以 下简称"南华工业"）发生不超过人民币 3,000 万元日常关联交易、与隆佳安全科技（泰州） 有限公司（以下简称"隆佳科技"）发生不超过人民币 626 万元日常关联交易、与佳豪船舶技 术（上海）有限公司（以下简称"佳豪技术"）发生不超过人民币 630.4 万元日常关联交易、 与广东湛江湾佳豪海洋工程有限公司（以下简称"湛江湾佳豪"）发生不超过人民币 915 万元 日常关联交易，及与公司董事长何旭东先生控制的关联企业等关联方新增发生不超过人民币 3,027 万元日常关联交易。 2、2025 年 2 月 21 日，公司召开第六届董事会第十次会议、第六届监事会第七次会议审 议通过了《关于全资子公司签订日常关联交易合同的议案》，同意全资子公司江苏大津重工有 限公司与关联 ...

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article highlights the growth in China's civil steel shipbuilding industry, with a projected production of 4.57 million deadweight tons in June 2025, representing a year-on-year increase of 6.2% [1] - Cumulative production for the first half of 2025 is reported at 24.355 million deadweight tons, showing a cumulative growth of 9.4% [1] - The article references several listed companies in the industry, including China Shipbuilding (600150), China Heavy Industry (601989), and others, indicating a broad market interest [1] Group 2 - The data is sourced from the National Bureau of Statistics and organized by Zhiyan Consulting, emphasizing the reliability of the information [3]

证券代码：300008 证券简称：天海防务 公告编号：2025-064 4、二审判决结果：驳回上诉，维持原判。 5、对公司损益产生的影响：本次公司收到的法律文书为二审民事判决书，公司胜诉。后 续进展和执行情况尚存在不确定性，该诉讼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。公司将根据案件进展情况及时履行信息披露义务，请广大投资者理性投资，注意投 资风险。 天海融合防务装备技术股份有限公司（以下简称"天海防务"或"公司"）于近日收到上 海市第一中级人民法院（以下简称"一中院"）作出的《民事判决书》【（2025）沪 01 民终 4445 号】。现将有关情况公告如下： 天海融合防务装备技术股份有限公司 关于江苏金海运科技有限公司业绩承诺诉讼的进展公告 本公司及董事会全体成员保证信息披露的内容真实、准确、完整，没有虚假 记载、误导性陈述或重大遗漏。 重要内容提示: 1、案件所处的诉讼阶段：二审终审判决。 2、公司所处的当事人地位：一审原告，二审被上诉人。 3、一审法院判决支持原告诉请：（1）现金补偿款人民币 2.363.8 万元及利息；（2）奖 励款项人民币 1.392.31 万元及利息。驳回原告诉请：（ ...

Core Viewpoint - The Shanghai Financial Court and the Shanghai Securities Regulatory Bureau have released ten cases related to securities false statements, providing clear guidelines for market participants regarding responsibilities and behaviors that may violate information disclosure regulations [1][2]. Group 1: Securities False Statement Cases - The five typical cases of securities false statement responsibility disputes focus on issues such as "deceptive" share buybacks, the identification of predictive information, and the application of "safe harbor" rules [2][3]. - In the case of *ST Jintai, executives were found liable for failing to fulfill share buyback commitments, resulting in a compensation of approximately 780,000 yuan to investors [2]. - Shanghai Electric was held responsible for not timely disclosing performance losses, leading to false records in its 2020 annual report, and was denied the "safe harbor" rule exemption [2][3]. - In the financial fraud case of Zhong An Ke, three internal directors were held liable for relying excessively on intermediaries, while three independent directors were exempted from liability [2][3]. Group 2: Regulatory Enforcement Cases - The five regulatory enforcement cases focus on frequent violations such as "shell-preserving" financial fraud, performance-related financial manipulation, and abuse of control rights [3][4]. - Specific cases include *ST Jintai's executives violating buyback commitments, financial fraud in subsidiaries of Shanghai Shiji, and illegal share reductions by the controlling shareholder of Feikai Materials [4]. Group 3: Legal Responsibility Clarification - Recent judicial practices have introduced new types of disputes, including the legal applicability of different market segments and the identification of responsibilities for aiding fraudsters [5]. - The cases emphasize that information disclosure obligations cannot be evaded under the guise of predictive information and clarify the legal responsibilities of public commitments made by listed companies [5]. Group 4: Strict Enforcement and Accountability - The regulatory approach emphasizes strict enforcement and increased penalties for violations, particularly targeting key individuals responsible for financial fraud [6]. - For instance, the former chairman of Delisted Fuxin was found guilty of violating important information disclosure laws, while penalties were imposed on the controlling shareholder of Feikai Materials for illegal share reductions [6]. - The Shanghai Financial Court has received a total of 18,040 securities false statement responsibility disputes, with a total amount in dispute of 7.646 billion yuan, involving 26,956 investors [6][7].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent release of ten cases related to securities false statements by the Shanghai Financial Court and the Shanghai Securities Regulatory Bureau, providing clear guidelines for market participants regarding responsibilities and behaviors that may violate disclosure regulations [3][4]. Group 1: Case Summaries - The ten cases involve several listed companies, including *ST Jintai, Zhong An Ke, Shanghai Electric, and others, as well as delisted companies like退市富控 and *ST Ba'an [4]. - The five judicial cases focus on issues such as "deceptive" share buybacks, the identification of predictive information, and the application of "safe harbor" rules, with examples of both responsible and non-responsible parties [5]. - In the case of *ST Jintai, executives made false promises regarding share buybacks, leading to a court ruling that required them to compensate investors approximately 780,000 yuan [6]. - Shanghai Electric was found liable for failing to disclose performance losses in a timely manner, resulting in a false annual report, and was not granted exemption under the "predictive information safe harbor" rule [6]. - In the Zhong An Ke financial fraud case, three internal directors were held partially responsible for relying excessively on intermediaries, while three independent directors were exempted from liability [6]. - The case involving ST Xingyue highlighted that significant events affecting stock trading could sever the causal link for false statement claims, leading to the rejection of investor compensation requests [7]. Group 2: Regulatory Enforcement - The Shanghai Securities Regulatory Bureau's enforcement cases focus on frequent violations such as "shell protection" financial fraud, performance-related financial manipulation, and insider trading [7]. - Specific cases include violations by *ST Jintai executives regarding share buyback commitments, financial fraud by subsidiaries of Shanghai Shimao, and illegal share reductions by controlling shareholders of Feikai Materials [7]. - The regulatory approach emphasizes strict enforcement and increased penalties for key individuals involved in financial fraud, with notable penalties imposed on executives from退市富控 and *ST Ba'an [10]. Group 3: Legal and Regulatory Developments - Recent judicial practices have introduced new legal issues, including the application of laws across different market segments and the identification of predictive information [9]. - The article highlights the need for clarity in the legal responsibilities of public commitments made by company executives and the importance of not evading disclosure obligations under the guise of predictive information [10]. - The Shanghai Financial Court reported handling 18,040 securities false statement cases with a total amount of 7.646 billion yuan, indicating a significant number of investors involved [11].

Core Viewpoint - The Shanghai Financial Court and the Shanghai Securities Regulatory Bureau have released ten cases related to securities false statements, providing clear guidelines for market participants regarding responsibilities and behaviors that may violate information disclosure regulations [1][2]. Group 1: Key Cases and Responsibilities - The five typical cases of securities false statement responsibility disputes focus on issues such as "deceptive" share buybacks, the identification of predictive information, and the application of "safe harbor" rules [2][5]. - In the case of *ST Jintai, executives were found liable for false statements due to unfulfilled share buyback commitments, resulting in compensation of approximately 780,000 yuan to investors [2][4]. - Shanghai Electric was held responsible for failing to timely disclose performance losses and inaccurately measuring expected credit losses, leading to a false record in its 2020 annual report [2][3]. Group 2: Regulatory Enforcement and Penalties - The Shanghai Securities Regulatory Bureau has emphasized strict enforcement and increased penalties for frequent violations such as financial fraud and misuse of control rights [3][6]. - Notable penalties include a fine of 7.67 million yuan for the controlling shareholder of Feikai Materials for illegal share reductions and a 4 million yuan fine for the chairman of a subsidiary of Shanghai Shihua for financial fraud [6][4]. - The report indicates that as of December 2024, the Shanghai Financial Court has accepted 18,040 cases of securities false statement disputes, with a total amount in dispute of 7.646 billion yuan and 26,956 investors involved [6][7]. Group 3: Legal and Judicial Developments - New types of disputes have emerged in judicial practice, including the legal applicability of different market segments and the identification of responsibilities for predictive information [5][6]. - The report highlights the challenges in civil compensation cases related to false statements, particularly in the context of ongoing administrative investigations or criminal investigations [7]. - The need for improved coordination between civil lawsuits, administrative penalties, and criminal accountability is emphasized to enhance the effectiveness of investor protection [7].

（编辑 李家琪） 证券日报网讯 8月19日晚间，天海防务发布公告称，近日，公司配合山焦天海及中城统筹完成了股权转 让等相关事宜的工商变更登记手续。截至本公告日，公司已收到中城统筹支付的全部股权转让款人民币 4，107.52万元，公司不再持有山焦天海的股权。 ...

证券代码：300008 证券简称：天海防务 公告编号：2025-062 天海融合防务装备技术股份有限公司 关于设立全资子公司并完成工商注册登记的公告 本公司及董事会全体成员保证信息披露的内容真实、准确、完整，没有虚假 记载、误导性陈述或重大遗漏。 一、概述 近日，因业务发展需要，天海融合防务装备技术股份有限公司（以下简称"天海防务"或"公 司"）以自有资金 500 万元设立了子公司隆海领创（上海）企业管理有限公司（以下简称"隆 海领创"），持股比例为 100%。隆海领创已完成工商注册登记，并取得上海市崇明区市场监 督管理局颁发的《营业执照》。 根据《深圳证券交易所创业板股票上市规则》《上市公司重大资产重组管理办法》和《公 司章程》等有关规定，本次成立全资子公司不构成重大资产重组，亦不构成关联交易，不存在 重大法律障碍。 二、新设立公司的基本情况 名称：隆海领创（上海）企业管理有限公司 统一社会信用代码：91310230MAET68EF58 类型： 有限责任公司（自然人投资或控股的法人独资） 注册资本：人民币 500 万元整 法定代表人：董文婕 成立日期：2025 年 8 月 14 日 住所：上海市崇明区新河镇 ...

证券代码：300008 证券简称：天海防务 公告编号：2025-063 天海融合防务装备技术股份有限公司 关于转让参股公司股权的进展公告 二、本次交易进展情况 近日，公司配合山焦天海及中城统筹完成了上述股权转让等相关事宜的工商变更登记手续。 截至本公告日，公司已收到中城统筹支付的全部股权转让款人民币 4,107.52 万元，公司不再持 有山焦天海的股权。敬请广大投资者注意投资风险。 特此公告。 天海融合防务装备技术股份有限公司 董事会 二〇二五年八月二十日 第 1页 本公司及董事会全体成员保证信息披露的内容真实、准确、完整，没有虚假 记载、误导性陈述或重大遗漏。 一、概述 2021 年 12 月，天海融合防务装备技术股份有限公司（以下简称"公司"）与中城统筹能 源（天津）有限公司（以下简称"中城统筹"）等合作方共同设立了山焦天海有限公司（以下 简称"山焦天海"）, 以拓展能源贸易，增加仓储业务等发展需要。具体内容详见公司分别于 2021 年 12 月 15 日、2023 年 4 月 22 日披露的《关于对外投资设立参股公司的公告》《关于出 售参股公司部分股权的公告》（公告编号：2021-106、2023-03 ...

Market Overview - The marine equipment sector experienced a decline of 0.42% on August 19, with Guorui Technology leading the losses [1] - The Shanghai Composite Index closed at 3727.29, down 0.02%, while the Shenzhen Component Index closed at 11821.63, down 0.12% [1] Stock Performance - Notable stock movements included: - Yihard Technology (300810) surged by 20.00% to a closing price of 65.47, with a trading volume of 297,400 shares and a transaction value of 1.909 billion [1] - Guorui Technology (300600) fell by 4.26% to a closing price of 22.02, with a trading volume of 342,700 shares and a transaction value of 763 million [1] - Other companies like China Shipbuilding (600150) and Jianglong Shipbuilding (300589) also saw declines of 0.31% and 2.38%, respectively [1] Capital Flow - The marine equipment sector saw a net outflow of 2.313 billion from main funds, while retail investors contributed a net inflow of 2.226 billion [1] - Specific stock capital flows included: - China Haifang (600764) had a main fund net outflow of 48.276 million and a retail net inflow of 63.059 million [2] - Guorui Technology (300600) experienced a main fund net outflow of 74.836 million but a retail net inflow of 77.005 million [2] - Jianglong Shipbuilding (300589) faced a significant main fund net outflow of 86.541 million, while retail investors contributed a net inflow of 94.508 million [2]