are as follows: 1.     The companies required to meet the same qualifications and the requirement of information disclosure as the issuers are the affiliates that act as the central companies. The

296 and Section 296/2 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2559 (2016), as amended, (SEA). As aider and abettor, Amornrat and Walailuk violated Section 315 in conjunction with Section 242(1) which

Section 90 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (SEA) which states that no person shall undertake securities business without license. Violator of Section 90 is subject to penalties under

Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992), as amended (SEA), as follows: Apichart’s acts violated Section 242 (1), Eng’s acts violated Sections 242 (2) and 315, and Supanee’s acts violated Section 242 (1

of debenture without approval in violation of Section 33 and subject to the penalties under Section 268 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (SEA); meanwhile, Ornpaphat and Kanyakorn

approval from the SEC was in violation of Section 33 and subject to the penalties under Section 268 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (SEA). The Criminal Fining Committee therefore has

which will act as initial screener of ICO issuer. After the related notifications come into effect, SEC will initially approve ICO portals. ICO portals must be Thai companies with a minimum registered

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

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

Securities and Exchange Act of 1992 (SEA) in conjunction with Section 83 and Section 86 of the Penal Code, and liable to the penalties under Section 296 of the SEA, i.e., imprisonment for up to two years or a