trading orders were submitted via LINE.Failure to keep complete record of the securities trading orders were deemed as failure to perform the duties under Clause 23(3) and the prohibited characteristics of
operating net loss of 1,179.10 million baht in comparison with the net loss of 30.80 million baht in the previous quarter.The aforesaid action was deemed as taking advantage over the others by using inside
deemed as share price manipulation in contravention of Sections 243(1) in conjunction with 244 and 243(2) of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (SEA) and Section 83 of the Penal Code. The
such transfer. Their actions were deemed imprudent and careless fund management in contrary to professional codes of conduct, causing severe damage to the fund assets. On December 29, 2011, the asset
client in an unprofessional manner.The actions of {C}, {D}, {F}, and {G} were deemed performing duties beyond the scope of employment, taking advantage of client by virtue of duties, and using client
opened without requiring additional identity verification. In addition, Bitazza provided essential operational systems to Bitazza Global. The aforementioned actions by Bitazza Global and Bitazza are deemed
deemed beneficial to the adjudication process, the Court considered it a mitigating factor. Accordingly, the sentence was reduced by half under Section 78 of the Criminal Code. The final sentence is a fine
damage to IFEC. The public prosecutor issued a non-prosecution order. The case was deemed final. SEC Act S.307 311 313 in conjunction with Section 83 of the Penal Code Criminal Complaint Filed with an