After investigation, the Securities Regulatory Commission discovered that the company had problems such as inadequate due diligence on underwriting and sponsorship projects; poor quality control and core controls; and inadequate approval management of submission materials. The above situation violates the provisions of Article 17 and Article 31 of the “Administrative Measures on Securities Issuance and Listing Sponsorship Business”, Article 7 and Article 77 of the “Guidelines for Internal Control of Investment Banking Businesses of Securities Companies”, and Article 41 of the “Administrative Measures on Issuance and Trading of Corporate Bonds”. According to Article 64 of the “Sponsorship Measures” and Article 69 of the “Bond Measures”, the Securities Regulatory Commission decided to take administrative supervision and management measures to order corrections against the company.

After investigation, the Securities Regulatory Commission discovered that the company had problems such as inadequate due diligence on underwriting and sponsorship projects; poor quality control and core controls; and inadequate approval management of submission materials. The above situation violates the provisions of Article 17 and Article 31 of the “Administrative Measures on Securities Issuance and Listing Sponsorship Business”, Article 7 and Article 77 of the “Guidelines for Internal Control of Investment Banking Businesses of Securities Companies”, and Article 41 of the “Administrative Measures on Issuance and Trading of Corporate Bonds”. According to Article 64 of the “Sponsorship Measures” and Article 69 of the “Bond Measures”, the Securities Regulatory Commission decided to take administrative supervision and management measures to order corrections against the company.