by Noppawan and Viroj who allowed their separate trading accounts to be used for the YCI transactions in exchange for compensation.The aforesaid offenses were in violation of Section 243 of the

taking an unfair advantage of other persons in violation of Section 241 and liable to the penalties under Section 296 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1992.In this case, the offender refused to enter

conditions.  The three persons? offences were in violation of Section 243(1)(2) in conjunction with Section 244, and liable to the punishments under Section 296 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535

duty with responsibility and deliberation as a professional. Her misconduct was in violation of the Notification of the Capital Market Supervisory Board*. The SEC therefore suspended her approval as

and deliberation as a professional. His misconduct was in violation of the Notification of the Capital Market Supervisory Board*. The SEC therefore suspended his approval as securities investment

February 2014 before the information became publicly known on 28 February 2014. Such action was deemed taking an unfair advantage of other people.Chai?s misconduct was in violation of Section 241 and liable

that  he continued to submit trading orders in the same manner. The act of Surin constituted a violation of Section 244/3 and will be subject to punishment under Section 296, Section 296/1, and

without license, which is a violation of, or failure to comply with, Section 26 and is liable to criminal sanction under Section 66 of the Digital Asset Businesses Emergency Decree, i.e., imprisonment for a

seller were deemed as failure to perform duties with honesty and to adhere to the professional ethics and standard of conducts for the capital market personnel. The said actions were in violation of Clause

services liable to be an undertaking of digital asset business in the category of digital asset exchange without license, which is deemed a violation or a failure to comply with Section 26 of the Emergency