
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is proceeding with its criminal complaint against Bitkub Online Co., Ltd. (Bitkub) and two former directors.
The regulator found that information submitted about the 2021 theft of customers’ digital assets did not match the facts.
SEC officials have now handed evidence to Sub-Division 3 of the Economic Crime Suppression Division (ECD) for use in legal proceedings.
Next News reported on Wednesday (August 5, 2026) that SEC officials met Pol Col Winyu Jamsai, superintendent of Sub-Division 3 at the ECD, and Pol Lt Col Warat Sermsutjarit, an inquiry inspector in the same sub-division.
They provided further evidence and gave statements in the case involving the SEC’s complaint against Bitkub Online and two former directors.
The move follows the SEC’s decision to file a criminal complaint alleging that the company and the two former directors submitted documents containing false statements and concealed facts about the status of customers’ assets.
The SEC’s investigation found that digital assets were stolen from Bitkub Online in May 2021.
Customers’ digital assets across 16 asset types, worth approximately THB1.7 billion, were transferred out of the exchange.
However, the regulator also found that, from May 10, 2021 to October 30, 2021, the company did not reflect the incident in its daily net capital report (Form DA 1), instead continuing to show the asset balance as though no loss had occurred.
The SEC considered that this conduct could constitute an offence under Section 76 of the Emergency Decree on Digital Asset Businesses 2018, which covers false statements in documents required to be filed with the regulator.
The report added that Sakolkorn Sakavee and Thaweesap Rawan were company directors at the time and were responsible for submitting Form DA 1.
The SEC alleges that they are therefore liable in the same manner as the company under Section 94 in conjunction with Section 76 of the decree.
The two are also accused of making false entries in a document belonging to a juristic person to lead the SEC to believe that customers’ assets were still being held in full and that no loss had occurred.
The alleged conduct could constitute an offence under Section 88(2) of the decree, which prescribes penalties for false entries in such documents intended to deceive another person.
Based on the facts and evidence gathered, the SEC filed its criminal complaint against the following three parties for inquiry officers to take further action under the law: