performance of the company. The said entries were found in the financial statements: year 2008, Q1/2009, Q2/2009, Q3/2009 and year 2009. The public prosecutor issued a non-prosecution order. The case was deemed

materially lower than the actual value to deceive any persons about financial condition and performance of the company. The said entries were found in the financial statements: Q1/2009, Q2/2009, Q3/2009 and

lower than the actual value to deceive any persons about financial condition and performance of the company. The said entries were found in the financial statements: Q1/2009, Q2/2009, Q3/2009 and year

.com In case, none of the aforementioned entities had been licensed to operate securities business. Hence, their actions were in violation of Section 90 and liable to penalties under Section 289 of the

case, none of the aforementioned entities had been licensed to operate securities business. Hence, their actions were in violation of Section 90 and liable to penalties under Section 289 of the

licensed to operate securities business. Hence, their actions were in violation of Section 90 and liable to penalties under Section 289 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1992. This case is in the process

. Ekkamon Chuntori and gained benefits from such transactions. The purchases were made in such a way that taking advantage of others by using non-public information material to GLOBAL share price concerning

, who were his debtors. Later Mr. Sutin repaid Mr.Bhusana with the money received from the share sale. This case is in the process of inquiry by the special case inquiry official. SEC Act S.307 311 89

Central Bankruptcy Court's order. Mr. Bhusana acknowledged the order but persisted IEC to buy SK1 shares from Mr. Sutin and Miss. Charuwan Bhusanabhibankup, who were his debtors. Later Mr. Sutin repaid

receivership by the Central Bankruptcy Court's order. Mr. Bhusana acknowledged the order but persisted IEC to buy SK1 shares from Mr. Sutin Jaitham and Miss Charuwan, who were his debtors. Later Miss