+, which is the service of Zipmex Pte. Ltd, and gained benefits from digital asset exchange fees. Additionally, such operation of Zipmex had no measure to protect the conflict of interest and to control the
, Chupong was deemed to have performed duties dishonestly. In this regard, Chupong, were deemed to have committed offences in violation Section 311 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1992 (SEA), and
-General of DSI’s conflicting opinion on additional charges under Section 307, 308, 309, 311, 313 and 315 of the Securities and Exchange Act and under Section 264 and 268 of the Penal Code, and on the
Director-General of DSI’s conflicting opinion on additional charges under Section 307, 308, 309, 311, 313 and 315 of the Securities and Exchange Act and under Section 264 and 268 of the Penal Code, and on
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
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