investment consultants found that {A} failed to keep complete records of a high volume of client's derivatives trading orders; while {B} failed to keep complete documentation and evidence of many derivatives
securities trading decisions on behalf of the client. She then continuously made trading decision on behalf of the client for more than three months in high value and volume trades. {A}'s action was deemed as
authorizations for a long time for a high volume of securities and derivatives trading, which caused a great amount of damage to the client. In addition, she misinformed the client with regard to the amount of
high trading volume. They also traded RS shares on a continual basis, causing the share price to be inconsistent with the normal market condition to induce the public to trade RS shares. The acts of
in high volume and its price was changed. As a result, the trading of TAPAC shares contradicted normal market conditions. 09/11/2017 agreed to comply with civil penalties determined by the Civil
high volume and its price was changed. As a result, the trading of TAPAC shares contradicted normal market conditions. 09/11/2017 agreed to comply with civil penalties determined by the Civil Penalty
believing that TAPAC shares were traded in high volume and its price was changed. As a result, the trading of TAPAC shares contradicted normal market conditions. 09/11/2017 agreed to comply with civil
anti-money laundering authority as high risk business/ profession; (7) a client who is categorized as higher-risk categories by the anti-money laundering authorities or the Securities Industry