matching the purchased stocks with his clients? buying orders. Sanguan?s opportunistic use of investor information for his personal interest was a dishonest, wrongful action in violation of the rules

securities by major investors or foreign funds and news of high dividends of a listed company supposedly informed by an unnamed executive of that company. The SEC viewed that Nuttha?s advice was

of their clients in violation of the Rules of Conduct prescribed by the SEC Notifications. The probation for each wrongdoer lasts for one year, starting from December 30, 2006. Preecha was

actions were in violation of Clause 11(1) and (2) of the SEC Notification No. SorKhor. 15/2548 Regarding Approval of Investor Contacts and Standards of Conduct dated 21 June 2005. Investor contacts

account of the referred client; 3. Accepting her clients? assignments to make trading orders on their behalf. Sugunya?s aforesaid misconducts were dishonest and unprofessional in violation of Clause

} did not confirm the exact securities volumes and prices with his client. In addition, he sometimes sent trading orders and informed the client afterwards that the client has never objected or rejected

disagree with the change.  Accordingly, Bee?s purchases of EIC shares through the SET at the price higher than the tender offer price resulted in a violation of the tender offer rules promulgated under

information that might adverse affect the client's benefits. Failing to inform sufficient information by concealing material information is, respectively, in violation of Clause 20(2) of the Notification of

adverse affect the client's benefits. Failing to inform sufficient information by concealing material information is, respectively, in violation of Clause 20(2) of the Notification of Capital Market

any way. The SEC has considered that Pongsak’s misconduct of performing duties irresponsibly without professional due care is in violation of Clause 23(2) and he is deemed to have the prohibited