offering of certain types of Digital Tokens from provisions of the Emergency Decree relating to the offering of Digital Tokens or from the duty of filing of the registration statement and the draft
Information Transmission System. Such misconduct was in violation of Section 241 and liable to the penalties under Section 296 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992), which was effective at the
compared with the preceding year. □ 2. Supporting documents for consideration under Clause 4 (2): □ (1) Violation record, under the law specified in the Notification, of an applicant, directors, managers and
statement with auditor’s opinion for this fiscal year compared with the preceding year. □ 2. Supporting documents for consideration under Clause 4 (2): □ (1) Violation record, under the law specified in the
million in 2009, respectively.Their actions were in violation of Sections 312 and 315 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (SEA) in conjunction with Sections 83 and 86 of the Penal Code
the Notification of Capital Market Supervisory Board No. TorThor/Nor/Khor. 37/2553 re: Prohibitions for Personnel of Business Operators dated September 15, 2010. The actions were in violation of Clauses
-5 years or a fine from 200,000-500,000 baht or both and a further fine not exceeding 10,000 baht for every day during which the violation continues as specified by Section 289 of the SEA. The SEC
/Nor/Khor. 37/2553 re: Prohibited Characteristics of Personnel in Capital Market Business dated September 15, 2010. The actions were in violation of Clauses 23(2) and (3) and the prohibited
. ___________________________ Note: The misconduct of the investment consultants, one of whom was also branch manager, is a violation of Clause 23(2), and a prohibited characteristic of capital market personnel under Clause 31
securities without approval in the category of debenture in violation of Section 33 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992). The SEC has therefore filed separate complaints against the four