Thailand’s Securities and Trade Fee has filed a felony criticism in opposition to Bitkub On-line and two former administrators, alleging that the crypto alternate submitted each day net-capital studies, referred to as Kind DA 1, that failed to point out the impact of a 2021 theft involving about 1.7 billion baht (roughly $53 million) in buyer property.
The July 23, 2026, criticism to Thailand’s Financial Crime Suppression Division names Sakolkorn Sakavee and Thaweesap Rawan, who the SEC stated had been liable for the studies after they had been Bitkub administrators. The regulator alleges that Bitkub gave false statements and that the 2 former administrators made false entries in firm paperwork.
In keeping with the SEC, a Could 2021 cyberattack triggered buyer property throughout 16 cryptocurrencies to be withdrawn from the alternate. Bitkub’s Kind DA 1 studies from Could 10 by means of Oct. 30, 2021, confirmed no materials change in its asset steadiness from the theft, conduct the regulator stated amounted to false reporting.
The SEC stated subsequent info indicated that Bitkub started procuring alternative digital property on Oct. 31, 2021. The regulator didn’t say when that alternative course of was accomplished.
Bitkub says it feared a financial institution run
In its response to the criticism, Bitkub acknowledged that personnel liable for firm disclosures selected to not reveal that property from one firm pockets had been stolen. The corporate stated the choice was meant to stop a financial institution run whereas Bitkub was making an attempt to exchange the property. It disputed that the accused people had acted fraudulently.
Bitkub stated its co-founders absorbed the loss by shopping for the identical currencies in the identical portions. It claimed that neither the corporate nor its prospects suffered asset losses from the incident.
In a separate September 2025 replace, the SEC stated buyer digital property held by Bitkub had been protected and full as of Sept. 8, 2025. That discovering coated a later time limit and didn’t settle the regulator’s allegation about what Bitkub reported in 2021.
Asset alternative and regulatory reporting stay separate questions within the criticism. Bitkub says the nondisclosure was meant to avert a financial institution run; the SEC alleges that the each day studies failed to point out a cloth change within the alternate’s property earlier than alternative started.
An inquiry official will now examine and determine whether or not to advocate prosecution, based on the SEC’s criminal-action course of. A public prosecutor would then contemplate the file, and a courtroom would adjudicate the allegations provided that the case is introduced. The allegations stay unadjudicated.
