rendered a judgement in the Red Case No. Por. 5396/2562, wherein the defendant was required to pay (1) a civil penalty, 1.25 times the benefits that the defendant received or would have received from
information to sell IFEC shares, to pay civil penalty and compensation for the benefits gained from committing the offense. However, Suphanan did not agree to comply with the civil sanction. Later, on 27
Earlier, the Civil Sanction Committee had resolved to impose a civil sanction on the three offenders who were subject to pay a separate civil penalty and compensate for the benefits that should have
Earlier, the Civil Sanction Committee had resolved to impose a civil sanction on the three offenders who were subject to pay a separate civil penalty and compensate for the benefits that should
offences regarding market misconduct, and introducing civil penalty as an alternative sanction. Assistant Secretary-General Sakkarin Ruamrangsri said: ?The nature of market misconduct has become more
information and listed company executives? duty performance without due care, resulting in the total 31-million-baht civil penalty and the total 19.6-million-baht compensation for the equal amount of benefits
Earlier, the Civil Penalty Consideration Committee resolved to apply civil sanctions against Mr. A for obstructing and failing to set up a board of directors meeting and a shareholders meeting to
. (currently named Thai Bio Innovation Co., Ltd.), (4) Mr.Pollapat Srivisanwong, (5) Isan Palm Industry Development Co., Ltd., (6) Unity Palm Oil Co., Ltd., (7) Mr. Borom Engchuan, (8) GI Green Palm Oil CO
to bring the case against all offenders for the Civil Court to impose the highest civil sanction allowed by law in the form of civil penalty at the total amount of 2,303,065,651.33 million baht.The
under Section 296 and Section 296/2 of the SEA.The Civil Sanction Committee has decided to impose civil sanctions* on the three offenders above through the imposition of civil penalty, compensation at