Limited Hong Kong, which specialized in a diverse range of investment products and financial services for alien expatriates and residents in Hong Kong, Moscow, Shanghai and Bangkok. The aforesaid person had
range of investment products and financial services for alien expatriates and residents in Hong Kong, Moscow, Shanghai and Bangkok. The aforesaid person had not been licensed to operate securities
make investments. Furthermore, PFS advertised on www.fsplatinum.com that PFS was the administration office of Platinum Financial Services Limited Hong Kong, which specialized in a diverse range of
PFS to make investments. Furthermore, PFS advertised on www.fsplatinum.com that PFS was the administration office of Platinum Financial Services Limited Hong Kong, which specialized in a diverse range
to make investments. Furthermore, PFS advertised on www.fsplatinum.com that PFS was the administration office of Platinum Financial Services Limited Hong Kong, which specialized in a diverse range of
to make investments. Furthermore, PFS advertised on www.fsplatinum.com that PFS was the administration office of Platinum Financial Services Limited Hong Kong, which specialized in a diverse range of
PFS to make investments. Furthermore, PFS advertised on www.fsplatinum.com that PFS was the administration office of Platinum Financial Services Limited Hong Kong, which specialized in a diverse range
-General of DSI’s conflicting opinion on additional charges under Section 307, 308, 309, 311, 313 and 315 of the Securities and Exchange Act and under Section 264 and 268 of the Penal Code, and on the
-General of DSI’s conflicting opinion on additional charges under Section 307, 308, 309, 311, 313 and 315 of the Securities and Exchange Act and under Section 264 and 268 of the Penal Code, and on the
Director-General of DSI’s conflicting opinion on additional charges under Section 307, 308, 309, 311, 313 and 315 of the Securities and Exchange Act and under Section 264 and 268 of the Penal Code, and on