The complainant regrets that the Swedish language could have been affected
during the translation process.

Pleadings in connection with the Prosecutor's decision on 19 December
2023 regarding the closure and termination of the investigation regarding
alleged forgery and fraud committed by the plaintiff.

At the same time that the case is being processed by Svea Hovrätt,
the defendant in this case has reported to the police in Stockholm (case
number 5000-K174994-23) alleged attempted fraud by the plaintiff's CEO,
Professor Krzysztof Sienicki.

The documents and testimony submitted to the police by the defendant
are consistent with the documents presented in this case before the Svea
Court of Appeal.

The defendant's claims about alleged fraud have also been identical in
the police documents and the documents of the Svea Court of Appeal.

The plaintiff has extensively and proven in letters to the Svea Court
of Appeal that the defendant's claims of forgeries and/or fraud were
unwarranted, unfounded or even completely untrue.

The false accusation against the claimant, the arbitral tribunal and the
sole arbitrator was carried out in accordance with Article 55 paragraph
2 of the Swedish Arbitration Act to show that the recognition of the
claimant's arbitral award would flagrantly violate this article in terms
of public policy.

In particular, Mr. Brandenburg accused the police of:

1. The chairman of Villa Europa made Svea Hovrätt believe that the
Pan-European Arbitration Court (PESA) was a legitimate arbitration
institution,

2. The chairman of Villa Europa presented a forged document on 20 April
2023 before the Svea Court of Appeal claiming that Mr. Brandenburg had
agreed to PESA being the arbitral tribunal between the parties,

3. The chairman of Villa Europa presented pro forma invoices before the
Svea Hovrätt and claimed that expenses had been incurred (costs for
translations, analyzes and legal advice), which was not true,

4. The chairman of Villa Europa initiated an illegal transaction that took
place between the Bailiff and Villa Europa in December 2022. On January
5, 2024 (sic), the plaintiff (Villa Europa) received a Crime Report:
including suspicions, decisions and actors from the police in Stockholm.
I request that this document be attached to the documents in this case.

Crime decision-maker Roseneld, Leonardo, wrote (December 19, 2023) "There
is no longer any reason to continue the preliminary investigation. Based
on the investigative material that is now available, it cannot be
proven that the person or persons who were suspected have committed a
crime. Further investigation can is not assumed to change the state of
evidence in a decisive way." (See attached document from the police)

The Stutiig (Final) Police Decision constitutes further and unequivocal
evidence of the falsity of Mr. Brendenburg's baseless allegations of
forgery, both on the part of the claimant and the arbitral tribunal,
as well as that of the sole arbitrator.

Therefore, the provision in Article 55 paragraph 2 of the Swedish
Arbitration Act is not applicable in this case. Mr. Brandenburg has not
proved (despite the burden of proof being on him) that the allegations
mentioned in paragraphs i to 4 (above) were justified and true or at
least probable.

For the above reasons and for reasons set out in previous pleadings,
recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award by SVEA will be a just
confirmation of the principle of "pacta sunt servanda" and a confirmation
of the principle that provision of services requires payment.

Plaintiff maintains all prior claims.

I hereby request that the defendant pay additional costs related to the
long correspondence with the police, translation costs and costs for the
preparation of procedural documents (4 C17.40 +100% (express and over
weekend), 8 @17.40 €278.40 ( net), preparation of procedural documents
per hour 30 min (express and over weekend) €1725 (net).

Total €2,003.4 (net) €2,464.2 (gross).
Warsaw day as above.
Professor dr hab. Krzysztof Sienicki