orders were sent through over the internet and under her securities trader ID while the client acknowledged and did not reject the transactions. {A} admitted that she was the one submitting all trading
derivative warrant but did not inform the client of maturity date. In addition, there was no source of trading orders of her clients where {A} described that the clients submitted trading orders via mobile
application for renewal of approval can be filed with the SEC within March 31, 2012.?Although those affected, when compared with all listed companies and securitiescompanies, may not be a large number, the SEC
UWC (55% of OSCAR shares) to Thai Nakorn Parawood Company Limited ("TNP") at the price of 66 million baht. However, they did not report to the board of directors of UWC that OSCAR had already
by UWC (55% of OSCAR shares) to Thai Nakorn Parawood Company Limited ("TNP") at the price of 66 million baht. However, they did not report to the board of directors of UWC that OSCAR had
% of OSCAR shares) to Thai Nakorn Parawood Company Limited ("TNP") at the price of 66 million baht. However, they did not report to the board of directors of UWC that OSCAR had already entered
purchase or sell MILL shares, which led to a trading condition of MILL shares was not consistent with the normal market conditions. In addition, there were other 5 individuals, namely: Miss Pornwadee