Shape Robotics A/S

Company Announcement No. 05-26

14 March 2026

ISIN: DK0061273125  |  CVR: 38322656

Evidence of Coordinated Action Between Kromann Reumert, Danske Bank, and EIFO: Pre-Planned Trusteeship, Void Settlement Agreement, and Disciplinary Complaints Filed

Attached: (1) DocuSign Certificate of Completion; (2) Separately Signed Afviklingsaftale; (3) Disciplinary Complaint Against Teis Gullitz-Wormslev; (4) Disciplinary Complaint Against Albert Mungo Madsen

Shape Robotics A/S (the "Company") publishes the following factual disclosure regarding the Afviklingsaftale (settlement agreement) of 28 November 2025 between the Company, Danske Bank A/S, and Danmarks Eksport- og Investeringsfond (EIFO), prepared and administered by Kromann Reumert.

The Company has obtained and analyzed two versions of the Afviklingsaftale and the DocuSign Certificate of Completion. The documentary evidence establishes that (a) the settlement agreement was never properly executed as a single binding instrument, (b) the law firm that drafted it pre-designated its own partner as bankruptcy trustee 39 days before any court made such appointment, and (c) one signatory was permitted to execute the document without any identity verification. The Company considers the Afviklingsaftale void.

1. Two Documents, Not One: The Patchwork Contract

The Afviklingsaftale exists in two separate documents, neither of which constitutes a fully executed agreement:

Document 1: The DocuSign Envelope

Envelope ID: 1BFCABD2-4DFF-45D8-BAA3-853A918A548E. Created by Albert Mungo Madsen ([email protected]) on 28 November 2025 at 10:19 CET. Five of the six required signatories signed within this envelope. The CEO of Shape Robotics, Mark-Robert Abraham, never signed inside this envelope. He viewed it on 13 March 2026 but did not sign. The envelope status remains "Delivered" - not "Completed." Under DocuSign's certification framework, "Delivered" means the signing ceremony was never finalized.

Document 2: The Separately Signed PDF

Mark-Robert Abraham signed a separate PDF of the Afviklingsaftale on 2 December 2025 at 14:44:56 UTC+0100, using a Namirial CA Firma Qualificata qualified electronic signature - an eIDAS-compliant, certificate-backed signature. This signature exists on a standalone document, outside the DocuSign envelope. The five other signatories' signatures do not appear in this version.

The Legal Consequence

There is no single document bearing all six required signatures. Five signatures exist inside an incomplete DocuSign envelope. One signature exists on a separately circulated PDF. These were never unified. The document presented in court and relied upon by the trustee during the bankruptcy was a patchwork - a composite that does not exist as a properly executed agreement.

2. Complete Signature Analysis

Every signatory, identification method, timestamp, and document, exactly as recorded in the DocuSign Certificate of Completion and the separately signed PDF:

Source: DocuSign Certificate of Completion and Afviklingsaftale.docx_signed.pdf. Both documents attached to this announcement.

3. Key Findings

Finding 1: No unified execution

Five signatures in one document. One signature in another. No document contains all six. Any version presented as "fully executed" is a fabrication.

Finding 2: Zero identity verification for Kristian Anning (EIFO)

Four envelope signatories verified via MitID. Kristian Anning ([email protected]) has no verification recorded - none. He signed on a mobile device at IP 194.182.38.244. Kromann Reumert configured this ceremony and chose which signatories required MitID. The verification workflow was specifically set for each participant. Someone at Kromann Reumert made a deliberate decision to exempt Kristian Anning from identity verification on a DKK 20+ million obligation for a Nasdaq-listed company.

Finding 3: Ten days of documented knowledge

Between 3 and 12 March 2026, DocuSign sent ten daily reminder emails to the CEO requesting completion. Initiated by Albert Mungo Madsen. For ten consecutive days, Kromann Reumert had platform-generated proof the envelope was incomplete. During those same days, the Afviklingsaftale was relied upon in court as binding.

4. The "Kurator" Designation: The Trusteeship Was Planned From Day One

The DocuSign Certificate contains a "Carbon Copy Events" section. On 28 November 2025, Albert Mungo Madsen added the following recipient:

Name: Teis Gullitz-Wormslev

Email: [email protected]

Title: "Kurator" (bankruptcy trustee)

Organization: "Kromann Reumert"

Sent: 28 November 2025 at 10:26 CET

Viewed: 28 November 2025 at 10:32 CET (six minutes later)

Timeline:

25 November 2025 - Kromann Reumert files bankruptcy petition against Shape Robotics on behalf of Danske Bank and EIFO.

28 November 2025 - Albert Mungo Madsen creates DocuSign envelope and designates Teis Gullitz-Wormslev as "Kurator." Teis Gullitz-Wormslev views the envelope six minutes later.

6 January 2026 - Sø- og Handelsretten declares bankruptcy and appoints Teis Gullitz-Wormslev as trustee.

5 March 2026 - Østre Landsret unanimously annuls the bankruptcy.

39 days between the "Kurator" designation and the court's appointment.

The Company addresses the only alternative explanation - that this was an administrative error - and rejects it:

(a) "Kurator" is a precise legal term that exists only in the context of a bankruptcy proceeding. It is not a job title. It is not a generic label. No lawyer at any firm "accidentally" types "Kurator" when adding a colleague to a document.

(b) The designation was entered by Albert Mungo Madsen, a lawyer in Kromann Reumert's insolvency practice. He knew the legal meaning of the term. He used it three days after his firm filed the bankruptcy petition against the very company named in the document.

(c) Teis Gullitz-Wormslev is head of Kromann Reumert's insolvency practice. The designation matches his eventual court appointment exactly. The title was not "partner," "advokat," or "collega" - it was "Kurator," the one title that could only apply after a bankruptcy decree that did not yet exist.

(d) Teis Gullitz-Wormslev viewed the envelope six minutes after it was sent. He saw his own designation as "Kurator." He did not request a correction.

(e) Even if this were an error - which the Company does not accept - it would constitute gross negligence in the preparation of a legally significant document governing DKK 20+ million. A top-tier law firm that labels its own partner as bankruptcy trustee of a client company before any court appointment has failed its most basic professional obligation of care.

In either case - deliberate coordination or gross negligence - the conclusion is the same: Shape Robotics and its 4,800+ shareholders were treated with contempt by the very professionals entrusted with the proper administration of the Company's affairs.

5. 59 Days of Serving Creditor Interests

The same disregard pervades the entire trusteeship:

(a) DKK 199 million in assets written to zero - no market disclosure;

(b) Extraordinary General Meeting canceled - no market disclosure;

(c) Subsidiary Sanako Oy bankrupt - no market disclosure;

(d) Zero company announcements in 59 days for a Nasdaq-listed company;

(e) Company funds remain held on a Kromann Reumert client account - not returned after annulment;

(f) Funds transferred from the Company's Romanian bank accounts to Kromann Reumert under the void agreement;

(g) All company property still in former trustee's possession, eight days after annulment.

Five comparable Nasdaq Nordic bankruptcies (Odiko, Celuxit, Audientes, Spark Technology, Leeds) all maintained regular market communication. Shape Robotics: zero.

From the pre-planned trusteeship designation, through the patchwork contract, to the 59-day information blackout and post-annulment fund retention - every action served exclusively the interests of Danske Bank and EIFO, Kromann Reumert's paying clients. Not the Company. Not its shareholders. Not the market.

6. The Afviklingsaftale Is Void

The Company considers the Afviklingsaftale void:

(a) No single document bears all six signatures;

(b) DocuSign ceremony never completed (status: "Delivered");

(c) One signatory had zero identity verification;

(d) Kromann Reumert had ten days of documented knowledge of incompleteness;

(e) The agreement was created by a firm that pre-designated its own partner as the Company's bankruptcy trustee, demonstrating conflict of interest at inception.

The Company reserves all rights to claim damages arising from the unlawful bankruptcy, the void Afviklingsaftale, and the conduct of the former trustee during the 59-day trusteeship, including but not limited to the recovery of all amounts paid under the void agreement, loss of market capitalization, destruction of shareholder value, reputational harm, and all consequential losses.

7. Disciplinary Complaints Filed

On 13 March 2026, the Company filed complaints with Advokatnævnet (Danish Bar Complaints Board):

(a) Against Teis Gullitz-Wormslev (Partner, Kromann Reumert) - reliance on a void contract in court, unlawful withholding of Company funds, and zero market disclosures during 59 days as trustee of a Nasdaq-listed company.

(b) Against Albert Mungo Madsen (Associate, Kromann Reumert) - fraudulent DocuSign configuration including "Kurator" pre-designation and exemption of one signatory from identity verification, and participation in fund retention.

Filed pursuant to Retsplejeloven § 126, stk. 1 and Advokatetiske Regler.

Contact

Mark-Robert Abraham, CEO

Daily reports on :  https://substack.com/@mevk827

This announcement is made pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 (MAR) and Nasdaq Copenhagen's Rules for Issuers. It contains factual information and documentary references only. Attached for verification by shareholders, creditors, regulators, and the public: (1) DocuSign Certificate of Completion; (2) Separately signed Afviklingsaftale; (3) Disciplinary complaint filed against Teis Gullitz-Wormslev; (4) Disciplinary complaint filed against Albert Mungo Madsen. All complaints were submitted to Advokatnævnet on 13 March 2026.