Appeal Court overturned the judgment of the Court of First Instance on November 24, 2006 that dismissed the case. The Court sentenced the accused to five year imprisonment for entering into gas tank
thier own benefits, which fraudulently caused damage to PICNI's property, violating Section 307, 308, 311. The Appeal Court sustained the judgment of the Court of First Instance on November 24, 2006
Mr. Porames Laongsuwan Mr. Porames Laongsuwan aided and abetted Mr.Theeratchanon Lapvisutisin and Ms.Supaporn Lapvisutisin to commit the offences, thereby violating Section 315 of the SEA. The Appeal
Mr. Pinij Putrasart Mr. Pinij Putrasart aided and abetted Mr.Theeratchanon Lapvisutisin and Ms.Supaporn Lapvisutisin to commit the offences, thereby violating Section 315 of the SEA. The Appeal Court
Mr. Piriya Thawon Mr. Piriya Thawon aided and abetted Mr.Theeratchanon Lapvisutisin and Ms.Supaporn Lapvisutisin to commit the offences, thereby violating Section 315 of the SEA. The Appeal Court
cause the price or the volume of such securities trading to be inconsistent with the normal market condition and caused damages to other investors. 15/12/2020 The Civil Court delivered the Appeal Court
penalty to be imposed on the offender. Appeal Any person who is affected by, and disagrees with, an administrative order has the right to appeal such order. The appeal procedure is provided by the SEC
Class Action The Court may allow the Class Action to be conducted only when the Court is satisfied that: (1 ) the plaintiff’s complaint must be in writing and clearly set forth the nature of the claim and
depending on the severity of the case. If the penalized party disagrees with the SEC order, an appeal can be filed. Administrative sanction ensures that supervision will proceed stringently and efficiently