company, {A} has also contravened Section 89/7 by failing to perform duties responsibly and honestly, which is liable to the penalties under the second paragraph of Section 281/2 of the SEA, in conjunction
to the penalties under Section 296 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1992. He was subject to a criminal fine penalty. Given that the benefit he had received was lower than the minimum fine of
also received benefits from other relevant acts. His action was deemed a violation of Section 89/7 and subject to penalties prescribed in the second paragraph of Section 281/2, Section 307, Section 311
was consequently liable to the penalties as prescribed in the first paragraph of Section 281/2 of the SEA. Since Nittimon had refused to enter the settlement process, the SEC filed the complaint with
Securities and Exchange Act of 1992. Their actions therefore were in violation of Section 90 and liable to penalties under Section 289, which are imprisonment for a term of 2 to 5 years and a fine from 200,000
he received together with penalties. The investigation also revealed that during the client made the request for selling of investment units, {A} was serving another client. Without making any contact
operating digital asset business under Section 3 of the Emergency Decree on Digital Asset Businesses B.E. 2561 (2018) without license in contravention of Section 26, subject to penalties under Section 66 of
Leeswadtrakul and Miss Tanika Tangpoonphonvivat by allowing them to use their securities trading account and their bank account for the MILL shares trading. 22/08/2018 agreed to comply with civil penalties
>15/03/2019 filed a lawsuit to a civil court14/01/2019 referred the case to a state attorney for filing a lawsuit to a civil court24/09/2018 agreed to comply with civil penalties