order or an action which results in the offence that the company operated digital asset exchange businesses without a license. The Court of Appeal adjudicated that the defendant was guilty under Section
from the SEC, in violation of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992), Section 90 and subject to sanctions under Section 289. This case is in the process of inquiry by the inquiry official of
violation of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992), Section 90 and subject to sanctions under Section 289. This case is in the process of inquiry by the inquiry official of Economic Crime
Council of State.In brief, the Draft includes the following amendments: 1. Add provisions to accommodate electronic securities issuance (Part 2/1: Electronic Securities, from Section 62/1 to Section 62/11
(2003) which contains certain provisions in relation to the restriction of rights and liberty of persons which Section 29, in conjunction with Section 33, Section 34, Section 36, Section 41, Section 43
failure to perform duties responsibly, carefully and honestly under Section 307, Section 308, Section 311, Section 312 and Section 313 and Paragraph 2 of Section 281/2 in conjunction with Section 89/7 file
providing assistance or facilitation to Pasu. The acts of Pasu, Vichan, and Akarat were liable to be an offense of colluding to manipulate securities price in violation of Section 244/3(1)(2) in conjunction
concealing the identity of the person who was the real user of those accounts.Pattanapong?s action was deemed to be in violation of Section 243 (1) in conjunction with Section 244 and Section 243(2) of the
Capital Market Supervisory Board No. TorKhor. 4/2551 Re: Rules for Undertaking Derivatives Business for Registered Derivatives Advisors _____________ By virtue of Section 18 of the Derivatives Act B.E. 2546
Commission No. SorThor. 19/2552 Re: Report on Trading of Securities and Derivatives in Foreign Countries of Derivatives Broker _____________ By virtue of Section 14 and Section 19 of the Derivatives Act B.E