granted as well as signing cheques which were handed to four borrowers. Her abovementioned failure was considered a contravention of Sections 89/7 and 89/24 of the Securities and Exchange Commission Act B.E

") (Master Contract). This contract identified the subsidiary paying assignment fee to GISP, but this fee was transferred back to Mr. Aran. Later, the subsidiary entered into additional contract in

("GISP") (Master Contract). This contract identified the subsidiary paying assignment fee to GISP, but this fee was transferred back to Mr. Aran. Later, the subsidiary entered into additional

Limited ("GISP") (Master Contract). This contract identified the subsidiary paying assignment fee to GISP, but this fee was transferred back to Mr. Aran. Later, the subsidiary entered into

") (Master Contract). This contract identified the subsidiary paying assignment fee to GISP, but this fee was transferred back to Mr. Aran. Later, the subsidiary entered into additional contract in

("GISP") (Master Contract). This contract identified the subsidiary paying assignment fee to GISP, but this fee was transferred back to Mr. Aran. Later, the subsidiary entered into additional

") (Master Contract). This contract identified the subsidiary paying assignment fee to GISP, but this fee was transferred back to Mr. Aran. Later, the subsidiary entered into additional contract in

exchange of Zipmex Thailand. Then, Zipmex Thailand notified changes to the terms and conditions of the ZipUp+ services whereby the services of Zipmex Thailand were transferred to Zipmex Asia Pte. Ltd. in

;BX") transferred digital assets of its customers which possessed by BX to other digital wallets that did not for holding customers’ digital assets. Such action causes damage to other persons. This

involved in financial transaction concerning the purchase of GLOBAL shares. 26/05/2020 The Civil Court delivered The Appeal Court judgement upholding the Civil Court judgement and ordering each party to