trading decision and informed the client afterward. Examination on records of investment advice, trade order instructions and confirmations indicated that the client's instruction was unclear as certain
companies of relevant guidelines to be implemented in the same direction. For example, guidelines for mitigating the risks of COVID-19 spread when AGM is held and guidelines for supporting proxy voting. In
non- public information by Mr. Choedchu Sophonpanich, director and proxy for securities transaction of Wattanasophonpanich Co., Ltd, before such information became public on August 8, 2014. 16/06
shares and voting as proxy for shareholders in the agenda to purchase Kitha’s shares. The public prosecutor ordered a non-prosecution order. SEC Act S.307 311 in conjunction with Section 83 of the Penal
-pledging scheme and Kitha was not qualified to be a listed company in the Stock Exchange of Thailand. Their divided duties were meticulously planned, Mr. Nittimon involved in getting a proxy from shareholder
transaction and such transaction should be fair to the client under that particular situation. (3) Proxy voting (4) The calculation of the asset value of the fund should be carried out in accordance with the
transaction and such transaction should be fair to the client under that particular situation. (3) Proxy voting (4) The calculation of the asset value of the fund should be carried out in accordance with the
aforementioned assets. Moreover, the backgrounds surrounding NUSA’s petition for the Court’s revocation of the share swap contract with WEH shareholders remained unclear, with anticipated potential impacts on NUSA
are various unclear matters such as management structure, the board of directors’ structure, person holding Chairman of the Board of Directors position, and impact of the dispute on the lawsuit to
from unclear sources of capital to facilitate financial transactions, business operators are allowed to offer digital tokens for returns in cryptocurrencies or accept cryptocurrencies from customers only