The Beijing Regulatory Bureau of the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) has issued a highly cautionary administrative penalty decision. Feng Pengpeng and Ban Keke were severely penalized for fabricating and spreading false chip order information regarding a listed company, thereby disrupting the securities market.
I. Basic Information of the Parties Involved
Feng Pengpeng, born in 1982, resides in Changping District, Beijing. Ban Keke, born in 1989, resides in Longhua District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province.
II. The Entire Process of the Violation
Around 22:00 on August 29, 2025, Feng Pengpeng published a false article via a WeChat public account, fabricating information about a listed company receiving substantial additional chip orders. The article spread widely online, from which Feng Pengpeng profited only 119.83 yuan. On August 31, after being requested by relevant parties, Feng Pengpeng took the article down. On September 1, the company officially issued a clarification statement. Subsequently, Ban Keke obtained the original article online, rewrote and processed it independently with exaggerated descriptions, creating a second, more misleading article. Ban Keke published this article via a public account on August 30, ultimately profiting only 173.70 yuan. Similarly, the article was deleted after a request, awaiting the official clarification.
III. The Parties' Defenses Were Entirely Rejected by the Regulator
During the hearing, Ban Keke presented two defenses: The content was adapted from another person's article, generated with the aid of AI tools, and there was no subjective intent to deliberately mislead the market. Proactive deletion of the article, timely damage limitation, cooperation with the investigation, minimal personal profit, and ordinary family financial circumstances were cited, requesting a reduction of what was deemed an excessively heavy penalty. After review, the CSRC Beijing Regulatory Bureau clarified: The rewritten article deliberately added exaggerated descriptions, making it more misleading. As a self-media operator, Ban Keke should have been aware of the market impact of disseminating sensitive information about a listed company. The current penalty has already comprehensively considered all circumstances. The request for penalty reduction was not granted.
IV. Final Penalty Results
Feng Pengpeng: Confiscation of illegal gains of 119.83 yuan and a fine of 200,000 yuan. Ban Keke: Confiscation of illegal gains of 173.70 yuan and a fine of 250,000 yuan. The total penalties and confiscations for the two individuals exceed 450,000 yuan, presenting a stark contrast to their meager profits of just over a hundred yuan.
Administrative Penalty Decision of the Beijing Regulatory Bureau of the China Securities Regulatory Commission (Feng Pengpeng, Ban Keke)
Parties Involved: Feng Pengpeng, male, born October 1982, address: Changping District, Beijing. Ban Keke, male, born November 1989, address: Longhua District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province. In accordance with the relevant provisions of the Securities Law of the People's Republic of China, this bureau conducted an investigation into the acts of fabricating and spreading false information by Feng Pengpeng and Ban Keke. The parties were informed of the facts, reasons, basis for the administrative penalty, and their legal rights. Feng Pengpeng did not submit statements, defenses, nor request a hearing. At the request of Ban Keke, this bureau held a hearing and listened to Ban Keke's statements and defenses. The case investigation and handling are now complete. The investigation found that Feng Pengpeng and Ban Keke committed the following illegal acts: I. Feng Pengpeng fabricated and spread false information, disrupting the securities market. At 22:11 on August 29, 2025, Feng Pengpeng published Article 1 containing false information, such as a related party placing substantial additional chip orders with a listed company, via a WeChat public account. The aforementioned information spread and disseminated on internet platforms. Feng Pengpeng profited 119.83 yuan from this act. After being requested by relevant parties on August 31, 2025, to delete Article 1, Feng Pengpeng deleted it. On September 1, 2025, the relevant party issued a clarification statement. II. Ban Keke fabricated and spread false information, disrupting the securities market. Ban Keke rewrote Article 1 obtained from an internet platform, creating Article 2 containing false information, such as a related party placing substantial additional chip orders with a listed company. At 18:24 on August 30, 2025, Ban Keke published Article 2 via a WeChat public account. The aforementioned information, through exaggerated descriptions, was more misleading and spread on internet platforms. Ban Keke profited 173.70 yuan from this act. After being requested by relevant parties on August 31, 2025, to delete Article 2, Ban Keke deleted it. On September 1, 2025, the relevant party issued a clarification statement. The aforementioned illegal facts are substantiated by evidence such as screenshots of the involved articles, inquiry transcripts of relevant personnel, and explanatory statements, and are sufficient for determination. The aforementioned acts of Feng Pengpeng and Ban Keke violate the provisions of Article 56, Paragraph 1 of the Securities Law and constitute illegal acts as described in Article 193, Paragraph 1 of the Securities Law. During the hearing and in statements and defenses, Ban Keke argued: First, the involved content was adapted from Article 1 and generated by artificial intelligence tools; they failed to exercise due diligence in verification and had no malicious intent to deliberately mislead the market. Second, they actively took remedial measures, proactively eliminated harmful consequences, cooperated sincerely with the investigation, and the penalty amount did not match their profit, degree of fault, or family financial circumstances. In summary, Ban Keke requested a reduction of the penalty. Upon review, this bureau holds that: First, Ban Keke rewrote Article 1 into Article 2, adding exaggerated descriptions, making it more misleading. As a self-media operator with a certain level of influence, they should have been aware that this act could disrupt the securities market. Second, this bureau has comprehensively considered the facts, nature, circumstances, and degree of social harm of the parties' illegal acts, and the penalty measurement is appropriate. In summary, this bureau does not accept the defense opinions put forward by Ban Keke. Based on the facts, nature, circumstances, and degree of social harm of the parties' illegal acts, and in accordance with Article 193, Paragraph 1 of the Securities Law, this bureau decides: I. Confiscate the illegal gains of 119.83 yuan from Feng Pengpeng and impose a fine of 200,000 yuan; II. Confiscate the illegal gains of 173.70 yuan from Ban Keke and impose a fine of 250,000 yuan. The aforementioned parties shall, within 15 days of receiving this penalty decision, remit the fines and confiscated funds directly to the state treasury. Specific payment methods are detailed in the instructions attached to this decision. Simultaneously, a copy of the payment voucher bearing the party's name must be submitted to the Office of the Administrative Penalty Committee of the China Securities Regulatory Commission and the Beijing Regulatory Bureau for record. If the parties disagree with this penalty decision, they may apply for administrative reconsideration to the China Securities Regulatory Commission within 60 days of receiving this decision, or directly file an administrative lawsuit with a competent people's court within 6 months of receiving this decision. During the reconsideration or litigation period, the execution of the aforementioned decision shall not cease. Beijing Regulatory Bureau of the China Securities Regulatory Commission May 8, 2026
Comments