Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (SEA), as the case may be. This case is in the process of inquiry by the special case inquiry official. SEC Act S.312 315 Criminal Complaint Filed with an
Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (SEA), as the case may be. This case is in the process of inquiry by the special case inquiry official. SEC Act S.312 315 Criminal Complaint Filed with an Inquiry
the penalty under Sections 312 and 315 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (SEA), as the case may be. The said actions also caused damage to the company but brought about benefits to Mr
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. On November 21, 2022, the Samutprakan Provincial Court
result, their actions were in violation of Section 246 and Section 247 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1992, in conjunction with Section 83 of the Penal Code. The three offenders refused to enter the
offer for NMG takeover. As a result, their actions were in violation of Section 246 and Section 247 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1992, in conjunction with Section 83 of the Penal Code. The
to disclose IFEC’s default on its bills of exchange, following the SET’s request for clarification on 12 January 2017. Wichai’s actions appear to be intentional causing IFEC to be suspended from