they incompletely recorded client's securities or derivatives trading orders due to their receipt of such orders via mobile phone. The SEC therefore publicly diclosed their inappropriate behavior and
}, a securities investment consultant of the same company, did not record their clients? securities trading orders. The three persons admitted that they took large amount of orders via mobile phone in
million or 177% when compared with the same quarter of last year. This was resulting from an exclusive mobile phone project, a new project in the third quarter of 2018, recorded sales in this quarter of
the businesses in subsidiaries and associated the Company investing had improved operating results when compared to the same period last year. The business of mobile phone distribution business
} frequently failed to record his clients' securities trading orders as the same as {B} case as reported by his employer Phara Securities Plc. Both persons admitted that they took those orders via mobile phone
order form (Form F8) despite the fact that those trading orders were made via mobile phone. Use of Form F8 therefore was inappropriate submission of trading orders because such Form must be used in
had received the trading orders from the client's authorized person via mobile phone. The SEC further probed into the case and found communication record between {A} and the client's authorized person
a number of orders via mobile phone. For {B}, the SEC probed into the case and found that she failed to keep complete record of a number of a client's securities trading orders and admitted that the
Gold Futures Co., Ltd. that {A} frequently failed to keep records of his clients' derivative trading orders. He also admitted taking such trading orders via mobile phone or customers' instruction in the
orders sent through him for several days. {A} admitted that the securities trading orders were taken via mobile phone; the misconduct of which he had previously committed. In case of {B}, the SEC found