units of funds had been traded according to their intention. Miss Surasa Mungthaworn confessed that she had fraudulently taken over 17 million baht from clients to be used for her own interest
defendant admitted owing 20, 528, 521. 12 Baht to the plaintiff. The 2nd defendant admitted owing 10,329,384.24 Baht and agreed to pay to the plaintiff in the amount of 8,827,500 Baht by paying at least
compromise so the court made judgment based on a compromising contract. The 1st defendant admitted owing 20, 528, 521. 12 Baht to the plaintiff. The 2nd defendant admitted owing 10,329,384. 24 Baht and agreed
so the court made judgment based on a compromising contract. The 1st defendant admitted owing 20, 528, 521. 12 Baht to the plaintiff. The 2nd defendant admitted owing 10,329,384.24 Baht and agreed to
Permission (Movies Right) Contract. In this case, both parties could compromise so the court made judgment based on a compromising contract. The 1st defendant admitted owing 20, 528, 521. 12 Baht to the
also admitted taking such trading orders via mobile phone. In addition, some of his clients' trading orders showed the concurrent price and time of the securities traded or canceled. Furthermore, the
of conduct. 1) In case of {A}: the SEC obtained from Kim Eng Securities (Thailand) Plc. a report on its investigation in response to a complaint lodged by a client. {A} admitted that during the year
clients' securities trading orders. She then admitted that the clients' trading orders had been received via mobile phone and via blackberry messenger. In this regard, the aforesaid actions are in violation
routine inspection of Kasikorn Securities Plc, the SEC found that {A} did not record a number of derivatives trading orders from a client. {A} admitted that she received the client's derivatives trading
' securities trading orders. All of them admitted that the unrecorded orders were taken via mobile phone. The SEC therefore suspended them from duty as approved investment consultant for one month. For {F} and