. ___________________________ Note: The misconduct of the investment consultants, one of whom was also branch manager, is a violation of Clause 23(2), and a prohibited characteristic of capital market personnel under Clause 31
conditions. The three persons? offences were in violation of Section 243(1)(2) in conjunction with Section 244, and liable to the punishments under Section 296 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535
duty with responsibility and deliberation as a professional. Her misconduct was in violation of the Notification of the Capital Market Supervisory Board*. The SEC therefore suspended her approval as
and deliberation as a professional. His misconduct was in violation of the Notification of the Capital Market Supervisory Board*. The SEC therefore suspended his approval as securities investment
that he continued to submit trading orders in the same manner. The act of Surin constituted a violation of Section 244/3 and will be subject to punishment under Section 296, Section 296/1, and
execution of the scheme.Their actions were in violation of Sections 243 (1), (2) in conjunction with Section 244 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) and Sections 83 and 86 of the Penal Code
violation of the Notifications of Capital Market Supervisory Board concerning personnel in the capital market*, the SEC therefore suspended {A} from her duty as the approved securities investment consultant
securities without approval in the category of debenture in violation of Section 33 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992). The SEC has therefore filed separate complaints against the four
by Noppawan and Viroj who allowed their separate trading accounts to be used for the YCI transactions in exchange for compensation.The aforesaid offenses were in violation of Section 243 of the
taking an unfair advantage of other persons in violation of Section 241 and liable to the penalties under Section 296 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1992.In this case, the offender refused to enter