Month: April 2024

Pattani, A thief lured a 10-year-old girl into the bathroom of a mosque, hoping to commit an act of indecent conduct, but the resourceful girl managed to escape. I told my mother so I went to report the crime. Requesting the police to quickly catch the culprits. Afraid of doing it to other people CCTV captured images of the thief bringing a motorcycle and parking it in front of the mosque. Then he got out of the car and walked towards the group of children. Not far away After a while, the culprit can be seen leading the girl's hand in front of the mosque. Then walked into the bathroom on the side. Tried to indecently assault a 10-year-old girl. Soon the girl was seen running out. before the criminal followed him out and quickly fled on a motorcycle. The incident occurred in the area of ??Village No. 6, Puyut Subdistrict, Mueang District, Pattani Province, on the night of April 27 last. After the incident, the girl told her mother. before taking them to report to Muang Pattani Police Station The girl's moth er said: I just returned from studying the Qur'an. Sitting with two friends, it appeared that the man who had committed the crime came and asked the young man which way the mosque went. So he and his friend said that the mosque was in front. The man then devised a plan to take him away. The younger brother saw that the man was probably going to pray, so he lost track of him and his friends followed him. After walking halfway The man told his friends to go home, leaving him alone. The culprit tricked the younger sibling into the bathroom. then lock the door Said I'd like to do it. Then he gave me 100 baht, but he refused. and shouted that mother called causing the criminal to open the door and let him out Before telling the younger sibling not to tell mom. I'll give you 20 baht, but when the door opened, you ran away immediately. From questioning, Nong said that the culprit could only shake hands. Haven't done anything yet. It's good that he had the wits to escape. I want the officials to hurry up and catch t he culprits quickly. because he was afraid that he would do it to other children again Police are in the process of collecting evidence from the scene. including surrounding witnesses Images from CCTV cameras along various routes To speed up tracking down the culprits and prosecute them. Source: Thai News Agency

Pattani, A thief lured a 10-year-old girl into the bathroom of a mosque, hoping to commit an act of indecent conduct, but the resourceful girl managed to escape. I told my mother so I went to report the crime. Requesting the police to quickly catch the culprits. Afraid of doing it to other people CCTV captured images of the thief bringing a motorcycle and parking it in front of the mosque. Then he got out of the car and walked towards the group of children. Not far away After a while, the culprit can be seen leading the girl's hand in front of the mosque. Then walked into the bathroom on the side. Tried to indecently assault a 10-year-old girl. Soon the girl was seen running out. before the criminal followed him out and quickly fled on a motorcycle. The incident occurred in the area of ??Village No. 6, Puyut Subdistrict, Mueang District, Pattani Province, on the night of April 27 last. After the incident, the girl told her mother. before taking them to report to Muang Pattani Police Station The girl's moth er said: I just returned from studying the Qur'an. Sitting with two friends, it appeared that the man who had committed the crime came and asked the young man which way the mosque went. So he and his friend said that the mosque was in front. The man then devised a plan to take him away. The younger brother saw that the man was probably going to pray, so he lost track of him and his friends followed him. After walking halfway The man told his friends to go home, leaving him alone. The culprit tricked the younger sibling into the bathroom. then lock the door Said I'd like to do it. Then he gave me 100 baht, but he refused. and shouted that mother called causing the criminal to open the door and let him out Before telling the younger sibling not to tell mom. I'll give you 20 baht, but when the door opened, you ran away immediately. From questioning, Nong said that the culprit could only shake hands. Haven't done anything yet. It's good that he had the wits to escape. I want the officials to hurry up and catch t he culprits quickly. because he was afraid that he would do it to other children again Police are in the process of collecting evidence from the scene. including surrounding witnesses Images from CCTV cameras along various routes To speed up tracking down the culprits and prosecute them. Source: Thai News Agency

TAK, The first batch of cadmium tailings from Samut Sakhon and Bangkok has arrived in its original place in Tak Province but there is an order to temporarily halt the transportation process after encountering issues during the transfer. A convoy of cadmium waste trucks traveling from Samut Sakhon and Bangkok has arrived at the storage facility in Muang District, Tak Province. Upon arrival this morning, the trucks were weighed, and preparations were made to safely unload and store all the cadmium waste before the burial in the disposal pits. Officials from various agencies, including the Department of Industrial Works and the Tak Province Department of Natural Resources and Environment, supervised the process. However, the permanent secretary for industry issued an order to temporarily halt the transportation process after encountering problems. While unloading the waste from the trucks, the lifting chain has broken, leading to the suspension of the transportation process until the issue is resolved. The aim is to prevent any disruption to the entire process and ensure safety. Today, there will be a meeting to devise a new plan for unloading the cadmium waste from the trucks, involving relevant agencies. Yesterday's transportation summary includes a total of 179 bags, weighing a combined 254.36 tons. From Samut Sakhon, there were four trucks carrying 80 bags and weighing 112.61 tons. Additionally, there were six trucks from Bangkok carrying 99 bags, weighing 141.75 tons. Out of an estimated total of 13,000 tons of cadmium waste dug up from a landfill in Tak, approximately 12,420 tons was found at warehouses in recent seizures in Samut Sakhon and Chonburi and Bangkok. Investigations are ongoing to determine permissions obtained to exhume cadmium tailings from the landfill, owners involved. It is estimated that the entire process to moving cadmium tailings back to its original place for permanent burial will be completed by June 17. Source: Thai News Agency

TAK, The first batch of cadmium tailings from Samut Sakhon and Bangkok has arrived in its original place in Tak Province but there is an order to temporarily halt the transportation process after encountering issues during the transfer. A convoy of cadmium waste trucks traveling from Samut Sakhon and Bangkok has arrived at the storage facility in Muang District, Tak Province. Upon arrival this morning, the trucks were weighed, and preparations were made to safely unload and store all the cadmium waste before the burial in the disposal pits. Officials from various agencies, including the Department of Industrial Works and the Tak Province Department of Natural Resources and Environment, supervised the process. However, the permanent secretary for industry issued an order to temporarily halt the transportation process after encountering problems. While unloading the waste from the trucks, the lifting chain has broken, leading to the suspension of the transportation process until the issue is resolved. The aim is to prevent any disruption to the entire process and ensure safety. Today, there will be a meeting to devise a new plan for unloading the cadmium waste from the trucks, involving relevant agencies. Yesterday's transportation summary includes a total of 179 bags, weighing a combined 254.36 tons. From Samut Sakhon, there were four trucks carrying 80 bags and weighing 112.61 tons. Additionally, there were six trucks from Bangkok carrying 99 bags, weighing 141.75 tons. Out of an estimated total of 13,000 tons of cadmium waste dug up from a landfill in Tak, approximately 12,420 tons was found at warehouses in recent seizures in Samut Sakhon and Chonburi and Bangkok. Investigations are ongoing to determine permissions obtained to exhume cadmium tailings from the landfill, owners involved. It is estimated that the entire process to moving cadmium tailings back to its original place for permanent burial will be completed by June 17. Source: Thai News Agency

The Criminal Court orders 20 years in prison for "Banyin" for laundering money from the transfer of Sia Chuwong's shares. acquit mother and brother former female poker Indicating that there is still reason to doubt whether they know whether the money received is related to wrongdoing or not. On April 30, 2024, reporters reported that on April 29, at the Criminal Court, Ratchadaphisek Road, the court made an appointment to hear the verdict in the black case F 48/2022 at the prosecutor's office, the Attorney General's Office. The plaintiff is suing Mr. Banyin Tangphakorn, former Deputy Minister of Commerce and former Nakhon Sawan MP, the first defendant Ms. Srithara or Penitcha Phromma, the second defendant (Ms. Uracha's mother). and Mr. Prawee Watcharaprayongyuthi or Mr. Chaiphan Wachirakulton, the 3rd defendant (Miss Uracha's younger brother) for an offense under Anti-Money Laundering Act In this case, the plaintiff's prosecutor accused Mr. Banrin, the first defendant, and Ms. Uracha Wachirakulton, or Phae ngkhao, a former female broker close friend, and the second defendant in the F.33/2022 case. of this court confessed to conspiring and forging documents to pledge shares of Mr. Chuwong Sae Tang (Sia Chuet), a large real estate businessman. who had signed to pledge shares with AEC Securities Public Company Limited by amending the essential matters from the share pledge It is a transfer of shares to the second defendant, who is the mother of Ms. Uracha, without compensation. to jointly steal the shares for themselves or others by dishonestly, a total of 510,000 shares, worth 35,050,000 baht, and Mr. Banyin, the first defendant, along with Ms. Kanthana Sivathanapon or Namtan, a former Prit girl. Tee, the third defendant in the black criminal case number F.33/2022 of this court, who has confessed. Forged documents for pledging shares, which were documents of rights signed by Mr. Chuwong Sae Tang. By changing the essence from the pledge of shares to the transfer of Mr. Chuwong's shares of Pure Energy Company (EA) to Ms. Kanthana, amounting to 9,500,000 shares, totaling 228,000,000 baht, and then the shares were sold. Transfer money to a Bangkok bank account Central Pinklao Branch 2, account name Ms. Kanthana Sivathanapon, a total of 3 times, amounting to 28,000,000 baht. Ms. Uracha's actions and Miss Kanthana This is an offense of conspiring to forge title documents and use fake title documents. which the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court has issued a judgment and appears according to the criminal case number red at A. 636/2020, A. 637/2020 and A. 638/2020 of the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court which is a fundamental offense related to forging rights documents Electronic card or passport according to the Criminal Code which is of the nature of normal business or for commercial purposes Anti-Money Laundering Act 1999, Section 3 (14), the three defendants and their associates jointly commit the crime of money laundering By dividing the duties of committing an offense, the second defendant and the third defendant withdraw money or transfer money, which is a transfer or receipt of property related to the commission of an offense. Change the condition of property related to the commission of an offense in order to hide it or commit it in any other way. in order to conceal the source of the assets Disguise the true nature of acquiring, possessing or using property knowingly at the time of acquisition. or possession or use of such property is considered property related to the commission of the underlying offense which is in violation of the law. Please count the prison sentence of the first defendant after the prison sentence of the first defendant in the criminal case that occurred in Khlong Chan Subdistrict, Bang Kapi District, Suan Luang Subdistrict, Suan Luang District. Bangkok Noi District, Bangkok and others All three defendants denied it, but Mr. Banyin, the first defendant, admitted that he was the same person as the defendant in the case in which the plaintiff requested that the sentence be counted against 636/2020. Red number A. 637/2020 and black number A. 638/2020 of the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court. The correctional officers took Mr. Banin, the first defendant, from prison, while the second and third defendants received bail and traveled to hear the verdict. The court considered and found that The plaintiff's investigation led to the discovery that the first defendant, Ms. Uracha Wachirakulton and Ms. Kanthana Siwathanapon, jointly forged documents to transfer shares of Mr. Chuwong Sae Tang and led to his death. of Mr. Chuwong In the case of a predicate offense involving forgery of documents, the first defendant was charged at the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court. And in the case of Mr. Chuwong's death, the first defendant was sued at the Phra Khanong Criminal Court. which both cases The court has already given a verdict. In this case, the plaintiff has officials. AMLO investigation officer bank officer He testified that he concluded that After the first defendant, Ms. Uracha and Ms. Kanthana Together they forged doc uments to transfer Mr. Chuwong's shares and led to the death of Mr. Chuwong in the predicate offense of forging documents. Upon investigation of the financial route, it was found that the shares were transferred into 2 groups, Defendant No. 1. and Ms. Urcha jointly forged documents and transferred shares to the second defendant and sold all the shares within 40 days, then transferred the proceeds to the second defendant's Kasikorn Bank account 6 times, totaling 33,000,000 baht. baht and then withdraw cash from the said bank account several times. Including withdrawing with a check and then using it to pay for real estate to the second defendant's bank account, which was opened on the same day of receiving the transfer, or transferring the money to his own bank account that was newly opened. And it appears from the official investigation that the 1st defendant was involved by frequently using the telephone to contact Ms. Uracha, the 2nd defendant, including on the day of each transaction. The 1st defendant use d a mobile phone in only one area. with the 2nd defendant and Ms. Urasha. In addition, from a genetic material comparison, it was found that the 1st defendant and Ms. Urasha had a child together. and Ms. Uracha benefited from the assets obtained from the crime. And Ms. Urasha also bought a Porsche brand car. without registering the owner's name as his own with the intention of concealing Later, the said car was seized by AMLO. Upon inspection, it was found that the first defendant's hair was on the said car. It shows that the 1st defendant jointly took advantage of the car. which is property obtained by using money obtained from committing crimes to change the condition The first defendant has a relationship with Ms. Urachama has been here since the beginning of 2015, before the crime incident occurred. From an examination of the financial routes of the second and third defendants, it was found that they were connected. The second group, Ms. Kanthana, received a transfer of shares to a securities trading acco unt opened with RSB Company Limited. The trading account Tied to a Bangkok bank account The proceeds from the sale of shares in the amount of 98,000,000 baht were transferred to the said bank account. and stocks are traded on the stock exchange, money is transferred, and cash is withdrawn. From the investigation, it was found that the main actor in the transaction was the first defendant. They traveled to the bank to withdraw cash together. It is seen that the first defendant together with Ms. Uracha and Ms. Kanthana The forgery of Mr. Chuwong's share transfer rights document was an act aimed at gaining benefit from the value of Mr. Chuwong's shares. As for the methods for transferring shares, selling shares, transferring money and withdrawing money received from selling shares to purchase various assets. Even though the facts obtained from the documents do not appear to include the first defendant's name being involved. But the circumstances and relationship between the first defendant, Ms. Uracha, and Ms. Kanthana indicating that it was a joint plan from the beginning. The duties were divided for the mutual benefit of the 1st defendant, Ms. Uracha and Ms. Kanthana, who the 1st defendant attests to not having benefited from the transaction or the transfer of Ms.'s shares. Urasha and Ms. Kanthana Therefore, there is no weight to refute the plaintiff's evidence. As for the 1st defendant, it is attested that there was no forgery of the rights document and that it was not involved in the forgery of the rights document for the transfer of shares. No relationship with Ms. Uracha and Miss Kanthana It is used to challenge the judgment of the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court. It was ruled that the first defendant together with Ms. Uracha and Ms. Kantana forged the document of rights to transfer Mr. Chuwong's shares. Although the judgment is not yet final and is being considered by the Court of Appeal. However, it can be considered that the results of the judgment of the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court have weight that it can be heard that the first defendant together with Ms. Uracha and Ms. Kanthana forged documents of rights regarding the transfer of Mr. Chuwong's shares. The first defendant's evidence therefore has no weight to refute the plaintiff's evidence. The evidence presented by the prosecution is of solid weight and can be established without any doubt that the first defendant together with Ms. Uracha and Ms. Kanthana committed the crimes as stated in the complaint. As for the 2nd and 3rd defendants, it is seen that from the plaintiff's evidence it does not appear that the 2nd and 3rd defendants are related to the 1st defendant and that Ms. Urcha committed the crime of forging rights documents for the benefit of transferring Mr. Chu's shares. How do Wong sell stocks, receive money transfers, withdraw money, and buy houses and land? The facts can be heard only that the second defendant received the transfer of shares and sold shares of Mr. Chuwong. Receiving money transfers from selling stocks, transferring money, w ithdrawing money, bringing money to buy houses and land, and the 3rd defendant receiving money transfers from the 2nd defendant and withdrawing money through the management of Ms. Uracha. Therefore, the 2nd defendant, who is the mother of Ms. Urcha and the 3rd defendant, who are the 2nd defendant's son and Ms. Urcha's younger brother, can be considered to have a close relationship with each other, and the 2nd defendant and the 3rd defendant admit that they have been involved in the operation. with various financial transactions according to Ms. Urcha's orders and by Ms. Urcha's management, together with the plaintiff has no evidence to show that the 2nd and 3rd defendants knew or had reasonable cause. Know that the money received from the sale of such shares It is money obtained from committing a primary offense or from supporting or assisting an action that is a primary offense. which is property related to the offense as per the complaint In this case, there are still reasonable grounds to believe that the 2nd and 3rd defendants may have taken action for Ms. Uracha without knowing that it was property related to the commission of an offense. The evidence presented by the plaintiff also has reasonable grounds for doubt that the 2nd and 3rd defendants knew that the shares and the money received from the sale of the shares Money received and transferred to other bank accounts Is it property obtained through the commission of an offense or not? Therefore, the benefit of doubt was given to defendants 2 and 3 according to the Criminal Procedure Code, Section 227, paragraph two. The verdict was that Mr. Banyin, defendant no. 1, was guilty of an offense under the Anti-Money Laundering Act 1999, Section 5 (1)(2)(3), 60. The actions of defendant no. 1 were For many different offenses, every offense must be punished as an offense according to Section 91 of the Criminal Code. The first defendant will be imprisoned for 2 years for each count, a total of 27 counts, for a total of 54 years in prison. Imprison Mr. Banyin, the 1st defendant, for a period of 20 years and count the imprisonment of the 1st defendant after the imprisonment in the criminal case, red number A. 636/2020, red number A. 637/2563 and black number A. 638/2020 of the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court Dismissal of charges against defendant no. 2 and defendant no. 3 Source: Thai News Agency

The Criminal Court orders 20 years in prison for "Banyin" for laundering money from the transfer of Sia Chuwong's shares. acquit mother and brother former female poker Indicating that there is still reason to doubt whether they know whether the money received is related to wrongdoing or not. On April 30, 2024, reporters reported that on April 29, at the Criminal Court, Ratchadaphisek Road, the court made an appointment to hear the verdict in the black case F 48/2022 at the prosecutor's office, the Attorney General's Office. The plaintiff is suing Mr. Banyin Tangphakorn, former Deputy Minister of Commerce and former Nakhon Sawan MP, the first defendant Ms. Srithara or Penitcha Phromma, the second defendant (Ms. Uracha's mother). and Mr. Prawee Watcharaprayongyuthi or Mr. Chaiphan Wachirakulton, the 3rd defendant (Miss Uracha's younger brother) for an offense under Anti-Money Laundering Act In this case, the plaintiff's prosecutor accused Mr. Banrin, the first defendant, and Ms. Uracha Wachirakulton, or Phae ngkhao, a former female broker close friend, and the second defendant in the F.33/2022 case. of this court confessed to conspiring and forging documents to pledge shares of Mr. Chuwong Sae Tang (Sia Chuet), a large real estate businessman. who had signed to pledge shares with AEC Securities Public Company Limited by amending the essential matters from the share pledge It is a transfer of shares to the second defendant, who is the mother of Ms. Uracha, without compensation. to jointly steal the shares for themselves or others by dishonestly, a total of 510,000 shares, worth 35,050,000 baht, and Mr. Banyin, the first defendant, along with Ms. Kanthana Sivathanapon or Namtan, a former Prit girl. Tee, the third defendant in the black criminal case number F.33/2022 of this court, who has confessed. Forged documents for pledging shares, which were documents of rights signed by Mr. Chuwong Sae Tang. By changing the essence from the pledge of shares to the transfer of Mr. Chuwong's shares of Pure Energy Company (EA) to Ms. Kanthana, amounting to 9,500,000 shares, totaling 228,000,000 baht, and then the shares were sold. Transfer money to a Bangkok bank account Central Pinklao Branch 2, account name Ms. Kanthana Sivathanapon, a total of 3 times, amounting to 28,000,000 baht. Ms. Uracha's actions and Miss Kanthana This is an offense of conspiring to forge title documents and use fake title documents. which the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court has issued a judgment and appears according to the criminal case number red at A. 636/2020, A. 637/2020 and A. 638/2020 of the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court which is a fundamental offense related to forging rights documents Electronic card or passport according to the Criminal Code which is of the nature of normal business or for commercial purposes Anti-Money Laundering Act 1999, Section 3 (14), the three defendants and their associates jointly commit the crime of money laundering By dividing the duties of committing an offense, the second defendant and the third defendant withdraw money or transfer money, which is a transfer or receipt of property related to the commission of an offense. Change the condition of property related to the commission of an offense in order to hide it or commit it in any other way. in order to conceal the source of the assets Disguise the true nature of acquiring, possessing or using property knowingly at the time of acquisition. or possession or use of such property is considered property related to the commission of the underlying offense which is in violation of the law. Please count the prison sentence of the first defendant after the prison sentence of the first defendant in the criminal case that occurred in Khlong Chan Subdistrict, Bang Kapi District, Suan Luang Subdistrict, Suan Luang District. Bangkok Noi District, Bangkok and others All three defendants denied it, but Mr. Banyin, the first defendant, admitted that he was the same person as the defendant in the case in which the plaintiff requested that the sentence be counted against 636/2020. Red number A. 637/2020 and black number A. 638/2020 of the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court. The correctional officers took Mr. Banin, the first defendant, from prison, while the second and third defendants received bail and traveled to hear the verdict. The court considered and found that The plaintiff's investigation led to the discovery that the first defendant, Ms. Uracha Wachirakulton and Ms. Kanthana Siwathanapon, jointly forged documents to transfer shares of Mr. Chuwong Sae Tang and led to his death. of Mr. Chuwong In the case of a predicate offense involving forgery of documents, the first defendant was charged at the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court. And in the case of Mr. Chuwong's death, the first defendant was sued at the Phra Khanong Criminal Court. which both cases The court has already given a verdict. In this case, the plaintiff has officials. AMLO investigation officer bank officer He testified that he concluded that After the first defendant, Ms. Uracha and Ms. Kanthana Together they forged doc uments to transfer Mr. Chuwong's shares and led to the death of Mr. Chuwong in the predicate offense of forging documents. Upon investigation of the financial route, it was found that the shares were transferred into 2 groups, Defendant No. 1. and Ms. Urcha jointly forged documents and transferred shares to the second defendant and sold all the shares within 40 days, then transferred the proceeds to the second defendant's Kasikorn Bank account 6 times, totaling 33,000,000 baht. baht and then withdraw cash from the said bank account several times. Including withdrawing with a check and then using it to pay for real estate to the second defendant's bank account, which was opened on the same day of receiving the transfer, or transferring the money to his own bank account that was newly opened. And it appears from the official investigation that the 1st defendant was involved by frequently using the telephone to contact Ms. Uracha, the 2nd defendant, including on the day of each transaction. The 1st defendant use d a mobile phone in only one area. with the 2nd defendant and Ms. Urasha. In addition, from a genetic material comparison, it was found that the 1st defendant and Ms. Urasha had a child together. and Ms. Uracha benefited from the assets obtained from the crime. And Ms. Urasha also bought a Porsche brand car. without registering the owner's name as his own with the intention of concealing Later, the said car was seized by AMLO. Upon inspection, it was found that the first defendant's hair was on the said car. It shows that the 1st defendant jointly took advantage of the car. which is property obtained by using money obtained from committing crimes to change the condition The first defendant has a relationship with Ms. Urachama has been here since the beginning of 2015, before the crime incident occurred. From an examination of the financial routes of the second and third defendants, it was found that they were connected. The second group, Ms. Kanthana, received a transfer of shares to a securities trading acco unt opened with RSB Company Limited. The trading account Tied to a Bangkok bank account The proceeds from the sale of shares in the amount of 98,000,000 baht were transferred to the said bank account. and stocks are traded on the stock exchange, money is transferred, and cash is withdrawn. From the investigation, it was found that the main actor in the transaction was the first defendant. They traveled to the bank to withdraw cash together. It is seen that the first defendant together with Ms. Uracha and Ms. Kanthana The forgery of Mr. Chuwong's share transfer rights document was an act aimed at gaining benefit from the value of Mr. Chuwong's shares. As for the methods for transferring shares, selling shares, transferring money and withdrawing money received from selling shares to purchase various assets. Even though the facts obtained from the documents do not appear to include the first defendant's name being involved. But the circumstances and relationship between the first defendant, Ms. Uracha, and Ms. Kanthana indicating that it was a joint plan from the beginning. The duties were divided for the mutual benefit of the 1st defendant, Ms. Uracha and Ms. Kanthana, who the 1st defendant attests to not having benefited from the transaction or the transfer of Ms.'s shares. Urasha and Ms. Kanthana Therefore, there is no weight to refute the plaintiff's evidence. As for the 1st defendant, it is attested that there was no forgery of the rights document and that it was not involved in the forgery of the rights document for the transfer of shares. No relationship with Ms. Uracha and Miss Kanthana It is used to challenge the judgment of the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court. It was ruled that the first defendant together with Ms. Uracha and Ms. Kantana forged the document of rights to transfer Mr. Chuwong's shares. Although the judgment is not yet final and is being considered by the Court of Appeal. However, it can be considered that the results of the judgment of the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court have weight that it can be heard that the first defendant together with Ms. Uracha and Ms. Kanthana forged documents of rights regarding the transfer of Mr. Chuwong's shares. The first defendant's evidence therefore has no weight to refute the plaintiff's evidence. The evidence presented by the prosecution is of solid weight and can be established without any doubt that the first defendant together with Ms. Uracha and Ms. Kanthana committed the crimes as stated in the complaint. As for the 2nd and 3rd defendants, it is seen that from the plaintiff's evidence it does not appear that the 2nd and 3rd defendants are related to the 1st defendant and that Ms. Urcha committed the crime of forging rights documents for the benefit of transferring Mr. Chu's shares. How do Wong sell stocks, receive money transfers, withdraw money, and buy houses and land? The facts can be heard only that the second defendant received the transfer of shares and sold shares of Mr. Chuwong. Receiving money transfers from selling stocks, transferring money, w ithdrawing money, bringing money to buy houses and land, and the 3rd defendant receiving money transfers from the 2nd defendant and withdrawing money through the management of Ms. Uracha. Therefore, the 2nd defendant, who is the mother of Ms. Urcha and the 3rd defendant, who are the 2nd defendant's son and Ms. Urcha's younger brother, can be considered to have a close relationship with each other, and the 2nd defendant and the 3rd defendant admit that they have been involved in the operation. with various financial transactions according to Ms. Urcha's orders and by Ms. Urcha's management, together with the plaintiff has no evidence to show that the 2nd and 3rd defendants knew or had reasonable cause. Know that the money received from the sale of such shares It is money obtained from committing a primary offense or from supporting or assisting an action that is a primary offense. which is property related to the offense as per the complaint In this case, there are still reasonable grounds to believe that the 2nd and 3rd defendants may have taken action for Ms. Uracha without knowing that it was property related to the commission of an offense. The evidence presented by the plaintiff also has reasonable grounds for doubt that the 2nd and 3rd defendants knew that the shares and the money received from the sale of the shares Money received and transferred to other bank accounts Is it property obtained through the commission of an offense or not? Therefore, the benefit of doubt was given to defendants 2 and 3 according to the Criminal Procedure Code, Section 227, paragraph two. The verdict was that Mr. Banyin, defendant no. 1, was guilty of an offense under the Anti-Money Laundering Act 1999, Section 5 (1)(2)(3), 60. The actions of defendant no. 1 were For many different offenses, every offense must be punished as an offense according to Section 91 of the Criminal Code. The first defendant will be imprisoned for 2 years for each count, a total of 27 counts, for a total of 54 years in prison. Imprison Mr. Banyin, the 1st defendant, for a period of 20 years and count the imprisonment of the 1st defendant after the imprisonment in the criminal case, red number A. 636/2020, red number A. 637/2563 and black number A. 638/2020 of the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court Dismissal of charges against defendant no. 2 and defendant no. 3 Source: Thai News Agency

Nonthaburi, Nonthaburi police raided and arrested the man who shot his next-door neighbor to death in a condominium in Nonthaburi Province. They controlled the investigation before taking him to make the plan. The cause was a problem with a dog that the couple had raised for more than a year. Nonthaburi Provincial Investigative Police and Bang Bua Thong Police Station investigators raided and arrested Mr. Narin, age 47, the gunman who shot Mr. Kongchai. roommate Died in a condominium in Nonthaburi After the incident Mr. Narin got a haircut. Changing clothes and changing cars to trick the officers before fleeing to hide at a friend's house in Bangkok Yai area The police detained him for questioning. Before being taken to make a plan at the scene of the crime, the reason for the shooting was due to a problem with the dog that the couple had raised for more than 1 year. Source: Thai News Agency

Nonthaburi, Nonthaburi police raided and arrested the man who shot his next-door neighbor to death in a condominium in Nonthaburi Province. They controlled the investigation before taking him to make the plan. The cause was a problem with a dog that the couple had raised for more than a year. Nonthaburi Provincial Investigative Police and Bang Bua Thong Police Station investigators raided and arrested Mr. Narin, age 47, the gunman who shot Mr. Kongchai. roommate Died in a condominium in Nonthaburi After the incident Mr. Narin got a haircut. Changing clothes and changing cars to trick the officers before fleeing to hide at a friend's house in Bangkok Yai area The police detained him for questioning. Before being taken to make a plan at the scene of the crime, the reason for the shooting was due to a problem with the dog that the couple had raised for more than 1 year. Source: Thai News Agency