March 16, 2023: in the Criminal Court for cases of corruption and misconduct in the middle of the court hearing Case Number Du Or Tor 139/2565 that the Attorney General (Sor Sor.) has filed a lawsuit against Mr.Warut Suwakorn The former Director and President of TOT Public Company Limited was a defendant in contravention of the Act on Offenses by Employees in Government Organizations or Agencies.
In this case, the plaintiff sued that acting Director of the defendant General Manager and later appointed President of the Company TOT Public Company Limited, the injured person, the defendant is an employee under Action on employee offenses in government organizations or agencies and government officials under the Organic Act on Anti-Corruption Act 1999 and Organic Act on Anti- corruption 2018 on January 14, 2020, the Cabinet meeting (Cabinet) has approved allowing TOT Public Company Limited and CAT Telecom Public Company Limited to merge into one company according to the Public Company Limited Act 1992 under the name National Telecommunications Public Company Limited ‘the Ministry of Finance is wholly owned by the National Telecommunications Public Company Limited, and therefore assumes all the assets, debts, rights, duties and responsibilities of TOT Public Company Limited according to the Public Limited Companies Act BE 2535. Section 152 and Section 153 and be a state enterprise under the Ministry of the Digital Economy and Society in accordance with the Budget Procedure Act BE 2502, Section 3 and the Budget Procedure Act b BE 2561 Section 4
During 30 April – 13 October 2008, continuous and related daylight hours The defendant was assigned by the Board of Directors of TOT Public Company Limited to negotiate with Samart I-Mobile Public Company Limited of the case on December 21, 2007 that TOT Public Company Limited had ‘to file with the Civil Court. Breach of contract and claim 2,648,771,009 baht plus interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum of the principal after the filing date.
Defendant, who is an employee who has a duty to buy, make, manage and maintain the company’s assets. TOT Public Co, Ltd has fraudulently abused its authority. which is detrimental to TOT Public Company Limited, acts or omits to perform his duties wrongly to cause damage to TOT Public Company Limited, or dishonestly by The defendant approves payment to Samart Company i-mobile Public Company Limited in the amount of 1,476 million baht (excluding VAT), which is more than the amount of 10 million baht that the defendant has the power to approve. The exception was also not recorded in accordance with the order of the Board of Directors of TOT Plc and the defendant did not ask for approval of such a payment. According to the TOT Board of Directors meeting, Samart I-Mobile Public Company Limited received compensation in an amount greater than TOT Public Company Limited should have to pay.
the acts of the defendant Therefore, it is a fraudulent use of power in duty. which harms TOT Public Company Limited and abuses its authority, causing the Company TOT Public Company Limited was damaged, a total of 525,370,000 baht compensation, which occurred in Thung Song Hong Subdistrict, Lak Si District, Bangkok.
The complainant requested that the defendant be punished accordingly. Act on Offenses by Employees in Government Institutions or Agencies, 1959, Sections 3,8 and 11. During the discussion, the National Telecommunications Company Public Company Limited filed an application for the defendant to Pay compensation to the petitioner in the sum of 525,370,000 baht plus interest.
The defendant denied accusations that the defendant approved the payment to the company. Samart I-Mobile Public Company Limited in accordance with the results of the discussions of the Board of Directors to consider and decide on the proposed guidelines. and the decision of the TOT Board of Directors at meeting No. 19/2008 in giving authority to the defendant to approve the payment of the lawsuit due to the management Contract management
Both comply with the contract except that the defendant has the authority to approve payments of more than 10 million baht as ordered by the committee. TOT Plc No. 29/2546 and the defendant is not required to allow the meeting of the Board of Directors of TOT Plc to consider and approve the payment of such sum. Because according to the decision of the meeting No. 19/2551 the above gave authority to the defendant and in accordance with the order of TOT Public Company Limited No. 10/2561 on the results of the investigation into civil liability, concluding that the payment was not after the legal proceedings against the defendant are civil. Therefore the defendant did not commit the crime as charged. And you don’t have to pay compensation to the petitioner.
When inquiring about the evidence from the court’s consideration together with the NACC investigation report, the preliminary facts were heard that TOT Public Company Limited or National Telecommunications Public Company Limited, the petitioner, is a state enterprise following the Budget Procedure Act, BE 2502 , Section 3 and in accordance with the Budget Procedure Act, BE 2561, Section 4, dated October 13, 2008, TOT Public Company Limited made a payment to Samart I-Mobile Public Company Limited in the amount of 1,476 million baht (excluding VAT) in accordance with the defendant’s approval. The case has a problem that must be diagnosed. Whether or not the defendant’s act of approving the payment is an offense under the law.
When the facts according to this lawsuit are heard that the defendant approved the order to pay money to the company. Samart I-Mobile Public Company Limited in the amount of 1,476 million baht (excluding VAT), which is more than 10 million baht. According to the terms of the contractual obligations in accordance with the Order of the Board of Directors of TOT Public Company Limited No 19/2546 , Clause 2.1 and 2.5, when considered from the civil legal action, it is a legal action against TOT Public Company Limited to pay money to Samart I-Mobile Public Company Limited for breach of contract and claims for damages If it does not possible to negotiate a settlement in order to comply with the obligations in the contract that will be an exception according to the order of the Board of Directors of TOT Plc The full amount as prosecuted in the civil case is the basis of the negotiation, so it is equivalent to accepting that TOT Public Company Limited is to blame and accept full liability according to the legal proceedings. In addition, the committee’s discussions are to be considered The decision on the guidelines did not comply with the comments of the Board of Directors meeting of TOT Public Company Limited No. 19/2008, and the defendant approved the payment to Samart I-Mobile Public Company Limited on the date October 13, 2008, which is more than a month, in accordance with the decision of the Meeting of the Board of Directors of TOT Public Company Limited No. 19/2008.
In addition, before and after the defendant approves the payment to the companyi-mobile Public Company Limited, there were many objections from people inside the defendant’s agency. In particular, checks payable to the company were cancelled. Samart I-Mobile Public Company Limited because the Finance and Accounting Department objected to the defendant’s power of payment. But the defendant still approved the payment. without discussing or asking for the opinion of agencies responsible for answering discussions or bringing them to the Board of Directors meeting TOT Public Company Limited to show that the defendant used prudence in deciding to approve the amount. which is equivalent to 1,476 million baht
The defendant’s action is a crime as an employee has a duty to purchase, manage or maintain property. Fraudulent use of power that is detrimental to the National Telecommunications Company Limited Public Company and is an employee who performs or fails to act improperly to cause damage to the company National Telecommunications Public Company Limited or by fraud As to the items that the defendant testified and denied the evidence No importance to listen to refute the plaintiff’s evidence. The two defendants testified that he had requested an extension of 1 month orally with the committee. TOT Plc. No such facts emerged during the investigation. And the class has considered it before, so there is no pressure to listen to it either
It can be asserted in the plaintiff’s evidence that the defendant committed an offense as charged. And he must be liable to pay compensation to TOT Public Company Limited or National Telecommunications Public Company Limited, the petitioner with interest as required. A judgment that the defendant is guilty according to the Workmen’s Offenses Act. In government institutions or agencies, 1959, Section 8, imprisonment for 20 years and the defendant to pay compensation to the petitioner in the amount of 1,062,147,006.16 baht with interest at the rate of 5% per annum of the principal amount 525,370,000 counting from the date of December 15, 2022.
