July 19, 1999

   The Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission(SESC) conducted the inspection of Nomura Securities CO.(Nomura) based on the provision of the Securities and Exchange Law(SEL) and found legal violations described below.
   The SESC sent the recommendation to the Financial Reconstruction Commission(FRC) and the Commissioner of Financial Supervisory Agency to take disciplinary action against Nomura pursuant to Article 29(1) of FRC Establishment Law on July 1999.

(The conduct of continued securities transactions on its own account to form deliberate market price which did not reflect the real market price and continued acceptance of transactions in knowledge of that such actions would not reflect the real market price.)

   When Nomura tried to execute a counter transaction of a so-called 'Ekidasi cross transaction'(round transactions conducted between a customer and a securities company to turn book value to market value),it realized that the stock price had become higher.Therefore,between 9:32 a.m.and 9:35 a.m. on March 9,1995,Nomura,by involvement of the equity division,conducted a series of sales at lower limit price on its own account with the intention of making a market price down to the price by which the counter transaction was able to be settled at the same price.

   When Nomura tried to execute a counter transaction of a so-called 'Ekidasi cross transaction'it realized that the stock price had been lower.Therefore,between 10:56 a.m.and 11:00 a.m. on March 17,1995, Nomura,conducted a series of purchases at market and higher limit price on its own account with the intention of making a market price up to the price which was able to settle the counter transaction at the same price.

   When Nomura tried to execute a counter transaction of a so-called 'Ekidasi cross transaction'of 7 stocks,it realized that the price of 6 out of them had been lower. Therefore, between 9:35 a.m.and 10:30 a.m.on March 24,1995, Nomura had requested the purchase orders of 3 stocks out of them to the customer beforehand and then accepted purchase orders from the customer and conducted a series of these purchases at higher limit price on the customer's account to decrease Nomura's loss which seemed to be generated by return transaction.

     (Violation of SEL Article 50(1)6)