Core Viewpoint - The legal opinion letter from Beijing Zhonglun (Shanghai) Law Firm confirms that the procedures for the third extraordinary general meeting of Guangdong Haid Group Co., Ltd. held on August 14, 2025, comply with applicable laws and the company's articles of association [1][11]. Group 1: Meeting Procedures - The meeting was convened in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations, with proper notifications published on media and official websites [3][5]. - The meeting took place at the specified location and time, with both on-site and online voting options available for shareholders [5][11]. Group 2: Qualifications of Participants - The meeting was convened by the company's board of directors, which is authorized to do so under applicable laws and the company's articles of association [6][11]. - A total of 911,195,303 shares, representing approximately 54.77% of the company's voting shares, were represented at the meeting [6]. Group 3: Voting Procedures and Results - The meeting utilized a combination of on-site and online voting, with a total of 574 shareholders participating in the online voting, representing 275,807,307 shares or about 16.58% of the voting shares [6][11]. - The following proposals were approved during the meeting: - The mid-term profit distribution plan for 2025 received 1,186,990,245 votes in favor, accounting for 99.9990% of the votes cast [8]. - The proposal for purchasing liability insurance for directors and senior management was approved with 1,186,546,344 votes in favor, representing 99.9963% [9]. - The reappointment of the auditing firm was approved with 1,185,924,961 votes in favor, or 99.9092% [10]. - The proposal to use idle funds for entrusted wealth management was approved with 1,167,719,720 votes in favor, accounting for 98.3755% [10]. - The proposal for conducting hedging business received 1,186,980,888 votes in favor, representing 99.9982% [10]. Group 4: Conclusion - The legal opinion concludes that all aspects of the meeting, including the convening, participant qualifications, and voting procedures, were conducted in accordance with applicable laws and the company's regulations, rendering the results valid [11].