safeguard the interests of the clients who entrusted the management of their private funds, using knowledge and abilities comparable to professional practitioners. This case is in the process of inquiry by

. Her action was deemed failure to perform duty with responsibility, due care, and loyalty for the best interest of the company, which was a violation of Section 89/7 of the SEA. This case is under

authorized director, causing the company to suffer losses. His action was deemed failure to perform duty with responsibility, due care, and loyalty for the best interest of the company, which was a violation

Mr. Soraj Asavaprapha While being a director of Jasmine International Public Company Limited (JAS), Mr. Soraj Asavaprapha failed to perform his duties with loyalty as a result of obtaining unusual

(6) Mr. Tanyapisist Saprod and (7) Miss Metta Poking jointly failed to perform their duties with responsibility, due care, and loyalty or failed to perform their duties with dishonest intent and

jointly failed to perform their duties with responsibility, due care, and loyalty or failed to perform their duties with dishonest intent and obtained unlawful gains for themselves or another person which

jointly failed to perform their duties with responsibility, due care, and loyalty or failed to perform their duties with dishonest intent and obtained unlawful gains for themselves or another person which

jointly failed to perform their duties with responsibility, due care, and loyalty or failed to perform their duties with dishonest intent and obtained unlawful gains for themselves or another person which

jointly failed to perform their duties with responsibility, due care, and loyalty or failed to perform their duties with dishonest intent and obtained unlawful gains for themselves or another person which

jointly failed to perform their duties with responsibility, due care, and loyalty or failed to perform their duties with dishonest intent and obtained unlawful gains for themselves or another person which