Adjunct Superintendent for Prudential Supervision Resolution No. 056-2025-SMV/10

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship Adjunct Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 056-2025-SMV/10 Lima, November 17, 2025 Summary: Credicorp Capital S.A. Sociedad Administradora de Fondos is sanctioned with a fine of 2 UIT, equivalent to S/ 8,800.00 (Eight thousand eight hundred and 00/100 Soles) for having committed one (01) serious infringement, typified in Annex VII, numeral 2, item 2.9 of the Sanctions Regulation; for failing to determine the risk profile of participants. Administered by: Credicorp Capital S.A. Sociedad Administradora de Fondos Subject: Administrative sanctioning procedure File No.: 2025040191 The Adjunct Superintendent for Prudential Supervision SEEN:
Administrative file No. 2025040191, Report No. 1579-2025-SMV/10.3, issued by the General Superintendent of Prudential Compliance, as well as the defenses presented by Credicorp Capital S.A. Sociedad Administradora de Fondos; and, CONSIDERING:

1. Pursuant to Article 1 of Law No. 29782, Law for the Strengthening of Securities Market Supervision, the name of the National Commission for the Supervision of Companies and Securities (CONASEV) is replaced by that of the Securities Market Superintendence (SMV), so that any reference to CONASEV in legal norms shall be understood as referring to the SMV;
   I. FACTS
2. On September 28, 2021, the COMPLAINANTS 1,
   acting jointly, signed with Credicorp Capital S.A. Sociedad Administradora de Fondos (hereinafter, CREDICORP SAF) a Mutual Fund Administration Contract for Securities Investment Funds. Subsequently, they subscribed to participation quotas in the following funds: Credicorp Capital Visión 2, Credicorp Capital Visión 3, Credicorp Capital Acciones Estados Unidos FMIV and Credicorp Capital Conservador Corto Plazo Dólares FMIV (hereinafter, FUNDS), allocating a total amount of USD 350,000 (Three hundred fifty thousand with 00/100 dollars

1 In the Annex attached to this resolution, the complete data of the natural persons to whom the designations used in this resolution belong are detailed, and also, if applicable, their email addresses.

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship American) to these investments. In their complaint, the Complainants indicated that as of November 13, 2023, due to the administrator's management, their investments registered as of November 13, 2023, a loss amounting to US$ 30,546.63;
3. By letter 2
received on January 2, 2024, the COMPLAINANTS filed a complaint with the Securities Market Superintendence (hereinafter, SMV) against CREDICORP SAF and the Banco de Crédito del Perú.
Subsequently, by complementary letters received on the same day as the filing of their complaint and on January 8, 2024, they sent additional documentation to this;
4. With Letter No. 101-2024-SMV/10.3, notified on January 10
2024 (hereinafter, LETTER), CREDICORP SAF was informed of the complaint filed by the COMPLAINANTS, in order for it to send the corresponding comments, as well as the documentation and/or information requested;
5. On January 18, 2024, CREDICORP SAF presented
a letter requesting an additional deadline to address the information and documentation requested via the LETTER, which was granted via Letter No. 269-2024- SMV/10.3, notified on January 19, 2024;
6. In response to the LETTER, on January 25, 2024,
CREDICORP SAF sent its comments regarding the complaint, as well as information requested by the SMV;
7. By letters received on February 9 and May 31,
2025, the COMPLAINANTS presented additional documentation to their complaint;
8. By Letter No. 3172-2025-SMV/10.3, notified on June 4
2025, additional information requests were made to CREDICORP SAF, which were addressed by CREDICORP SAF on June 11, 2025 with the submission of the requested documentation;
9. In its response letter to Letter No. 3172-2025-
SMV/10.3, the administrator indicates, among others, that it does not maintain any valid claim against the COMPLAINANTS, by virtue of an out-of-court transaction signed on August 16, 2024, hereinafter (OUT-OF-COURT TRANSACTION), the COMPLAINANTS withdraw their complaints filed against the administrator at Indecopi 3 and the SMV, withdrawal subject to the payment of USD 37,213.46 (Thirty-seven thousand two hundred thirteen with 46/100 American dollars) by CREDICORP SAF to the COMPLAINANTS for all concepts;
10. By letter received on June 13, 2025,
CREDICORP SAF presented complementary information to that sent in its previous letter;
11. With Letter No. 5262-2025-SMV/10.3, notified on
September 24, 2025 (hereinafter, CHARGES LETTER), an administrative sanctioning procedure was initiated against CREDICORP SAF for having violated the regulations governing the securities market;
12. On October 2, 2025, CREDICORP SAF requested the
extension of the deadline granted via the CHARGES LETTER for the presentation of its defenses, which was granted via Letter No. 5634-2025-SMV/10.3, notified on the same day;
13. By letter sent to the SMV on October 15
2025, CREDICORP SAF presented the defenses to the charges formulated via the CHARGES LETTER;
14. The charges formulated against CREDICORP SAF, the
defenses of the latter and their evaluation have been the subject of analysis in Report No.
1579-2025-SMV/10.3 (hereinafter, IGCP REPORT), which has been submitted to the knowledge of this Adjunct Superintendence;
15. In observance of the Principle of Due
Process contemplated in both Article IV, item 1, numeral 1.2 of the Preliminary Title, as well as in Article 248°, numeral 2, of the Single Text of the General Administrative Procedure Law No. 27444, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS (hereinafter, TUO OF THE LPAG), via Letter No. 6271 - 2025-SMV/10, the administrative file to which this resolution refers was made available to CREDICORP SAF for its review;
II. MATTERS TO BE DETERMINED
16. In the present administrative procedure, at
the discretion of this Adjunct Superintendence, it corresponds to determine the following:
a. Whether CREDICORP SAF incurred or did not incur a violation of Article 86-A of the Regulation of Mutual Investment Funds in Securities and their Administrating Companies, approved by CONASEV Resolution No. 068-2010-EF/94.01.1 and its amendments (hereinafter, REGULATION), for failing to determine the risk profile of participants; b. Whether it is appropriate or not to impose a sanction on CREDICORP SAF;
III. ANALYSIS
3.1 CHARGE: FAILING TO DETERMINE THE RISK PROFILE OF THE POTENTIAL INVESTOR
3.1.1 APPLICABLE REGULATION
17. Regarding this, Article 86-A of the Regulation
provides as follows:
Article 86-A.- ADVICE
Advice consists of determining the risk profile of the potential participant as well as the subsequent individualized recommendation to him, with the aim that his decision to invest or divest in a mutual fund is informed. Advice is provided to potential investors at the time of subscription, transfer and transfer of quotas.

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship For the purposes of the aforementioned profiling, the promoter must request from the potential investor, at least, information regarding their financial situation, knowledge and experience in investments, investment horizon and risk tolerance. The potential investor is responsible for the veracity of the information provided for profiling purposes. The administering company, the placement agent or the distributor must have policies and procedures that ensure the correct profiling of the client. These policies and procedures, as well as the support for the individualized application of the latter, must be available to the SMV when it so requests. The advisory activity comprises at least the following:
a) Determination of the risk profile of the potential participant. b) Explanation of the structure of the offered mutual fund. c) Explanation of the risks related to the offered mutual fund, as well as its historical performance, if applicable. d) Information on the relationship between the risk profile of the potential participant and the characteristics of the offered mutual fund, explaining why it fits their profile. In the event that the potential participant, after receiving advice, decides to invest in a mutual fund that does not fit their risk profile, the administering company, the placement agent or the distributor must inform them of this situation and the risks it entails. If after this, the potential participant maintains their decision to invest in a fund that does not fit their profile, a record of such situation must be obtained. The obligation indicated in this article is exempted in cases where the potential investor wishes to acquire quotas of mutual funds of very short-term debt instruments, or if it is one of the persons included in Annex 1 of the Regulation of the Institutional Investor Market.” (Underline added).
3.1.2 OF THE FORMULATED CHARGE
18. By letter received on January 02, 2024,
the COMPLAINANTS filed a complaint with the SMV against CREDICORP SAF, in which they allege, among others, that CREDICORP SAF did not perform a risk profile evaluation on them and that the placement of quotas in the FUNDS was done without previously having this evaluation, so that these products were not in line with their risk profile;
19. Based on what was stated by the COMPLAINANTS,
via LETTER, notified on January 10, 2024, the complaint filed against CREDICORP SAF was transferred to CREDICORP SAF so that it could express its comments;
20. By letter dated January 25, 2024,
CREDICORP SAF stated: (...) Regarding this, we comply with indicating that, pursuant to what is established in the disclaimer of the Subscription Requests for participation quotas of the Credicorp Capital Visión III FMIV, Credicorp Capital Vision II and Credicorp Capital Acciones Estados Unidos FMIV Funds (hereinafter, the “Funds”), dated September 28, 2021, the Complainants would have consented that, in case their investment decision does not fit their risk profile, they release CCSAF and the Placement Agents from all responsibility. On this matter, we consider the acceptance of the aforementioned disclaimer by the Complainants at the time of subscribing to the requests sufficient to justify the investment in the Funds. (...)

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship
21. According to what was stated, for CREDICORP SAF, the acceptance of said disclaimer at the time of subscribing to the participation quotas was sufficient to justify the validity of the investments made in the FUNDS;
22. In response to this, via Letter No. 3172-2025-
SMV/10.3, notified on June 04, 2025, CREDICORP SAF was requested, among others, the following: “(...) d. The documents that support the individualized application of the policies and procedures for the correct profiling of the client, in the determination of the risk profile of the COMPLAINANTS, in their capacity as participants in the mutual funds in which they invested in September 2021. As well as the document containing said policies and procedures.”;
23. In response to said letter, by letter of June 11
2025, CREDICORP SAF stated: “Attached is the extract of the Operational Procedures Manual (MPO), which details the client onboarding procedure. As part of said procedure, through questions, the client's risk profile is evaluated and, based on the answers, the corresponding investment products are offered.”;
24. Therefore, according to Article 86-A of the
regulation, the evaluation and determination of the risk profile must be carried out prior to the subscription, transfer or transfer of quotas, since this will determine the subsequent recommendation that will be given to the potential participant, of the mutual funds that fit their profile so that they make their investment decision with due information and thus avoid the placement of products incompatible with the characteristics and risk tolerance of the potential participant;
25. In this sense, CREDICORP SAF would not have complied with what is established in Article 86-A of the REGULATION, by not having previously determined the risk profile of the COMPLAINANTS before the subscription of quotas of the FUNDS;
26. Therefore, CREDICORP SAF would not have complied with what is established in Article 86-A of the REGULATION, because it did not determine the risk profile of the aforementioned COMPLAINANTS in accordance with what is established in said article;
27. Consequently, it was imputed to CREDICORP SAF that it had committed the infringement classified as serious, typified in item 2.9, numeral 2, of Annex VII of the SANCTIONS REGULATION which establishes as a serious nature infringement: “Failing to comply with the obligations and functions that correspond to it in accordance with what is established in the fund participation regulation, or simplified fund prospectus or in the contracts signed on behalf of the fund with participants and third parties or that are established in the regulations.”;
3.1.3 OF THE DEFENSES PRESENTED
28. Regarding this, CREDICORP SAF states that its letter does not constitute a defense, but an express, clear and unconditional acknowledgment of responsibility regarding the charge imputed. In this line, it requested that a reprimand be imposed on it as a sanction, considering the nature of the infringement, its collaboration with the procedure and the lack of antecedents;

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship
29. Likewise, it requests that when evaluating the imposition of the sanction, the mitigating circumstances of responsibility established in Article 26 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION be considered. In this sense, the administrator argues the following:
a) It has not obtained an undue benefit or any economic advantage, as a result of the infringement. b) The acknowledgment of responsibility has been made expressly, in writing and within the legal deadline, regarding the infringement under analysis, in accordance with what is established in Article 26 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION. c) It has not acted with intent in the commission of the infringement. d) It does not have antecedents linked to the imputed infringement that have the character of res judicata.
3.1.4 EVALUATION OF DEFENSES
30. CREDICORP SAF, based on Article 26 of the
SANCTIONS REGULATION, has expressly acknowledged its responsibility in the infringement imputed in the CHARGES LETTER;
31. Notwithstanding the above, it is necessary to
note that CREDICORP SAF is a company supervised by the SMV, with an operating authorization granted via CONASEV Resolution No. 053-95-EF/94.10 of January 25, 1995 and has knowledge of the regulations under which mutual fund administering companies operate, being required to comply with the REGULATION, which provides that the administering company must determine the risk profile of potential participants;
32. However, it has been proven that
CREDICORP SAF did not determine the risk profile of the participants mentioned in the CHARGES LETTER, prior to the first subscription made by them, so it failed to comply with what is established by Article 86-A of the REGULATION;
33. On the other hand, it should be indicated that what is mentioned by
CREDICORP SAF regarding the sanctioning criteria and the mitigating circumstances of responsibility established in Articles 25 and 26 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, respectively, will be considered at the time of carrying out the evaluation of the sanction to be imposed;
34. Consequently, CREDICORP SAF has committed the
infringement classified as serious, typified in Annex VII, numeral 2, item 2.9, of the SANCTIONS REGULATION;
IV. EVALUATION OF THE SANCTION
35. Pursuant to what is established in the regulations, the
determination of sanctions will be carried out in accordance with Article 344 of the Single Text of the Securities Market Law, Legislative Decree No. 861, approved by Supreme Decree No. 020-2023-EF (hereinafter, TUO LMV) and Article 25 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, in concordance with Article 248, numeral 3 of the Single Text of the General Administrative Procedure Law, Law No. 27444, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019- JUS (hereinafter, TUO LPAG) 4 , and the

4 Article 248°.- Principles of the administrative sanctioning power

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship mitigating and exonerating circumstances of responsibility regulated in Articles 26 and 27 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, in concordance with what is established in Article 257 of the TUO LPAG 5 ;
36. Within this framework, the evaluation of the sanction
must consider: a) antecedents of the offender; b) recidivism; c) the circumstances of the commission of the infringement; d) the damage caused and the repercussion in the market; e) the illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infringement; f) probability of detection of the infringement; g) gravity of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal good; h) the existence or not of intent in the offender's conduct; i) Voluntary declaration of the commission of the infringement and the contribution of the offender to its clarification;
37. Regarding sanction antecedents, it
should be noted that in accordance with what is established by Article 25° of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, antecedents constitute firm sanctions imposed by the SMV within a period of four (4) years prior to the commission of the infringement to be sanctioned regarding any type of offender. In this sense, it has been verified that CREDICORP SAF has the following antecedents:
Antecedents
No. Resolution Resolved Firmness i
Adjunct Superintendent Resolution
SMV No. 030-
2018-SMV/10 6
CREDICORP SAF is sanctioned with one (01) reprimand, for having committed one (01) infringement of a minor nature, typified in Annex I, numeral 3, item 3.1 of the Sanctions Regulation, for failing to comply with presenting occasional information within the deadline established in the applicable regulation. 11/06/2018

(...) 3. Reasonableness.- The authorities must foresee that the commission of the sanctionable conduct does not result in being more advantageous for the offender than complying with the infringed norms or assuming the sanction. However, the sanctions to be applied must be proportional to the non-compliance classified as an infringement, observing the following criteria that are indicated for the purposes of their graduation:
a) The illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infringement; b) The probability of detection of the infringement; c) The gravity of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal good; d) The economic damage caused; e) Recidivism, for the commission of the same infringement within a period of one (1) year from when the resolution sanctioning the first infringement became firm. f) The circumstances of the commission of the infringement; and g) The existence or not of intent in the offender's conduct”. 5 “Article 257°.- Exonerating and mitigating conditions of responsibility for infringements 1.- The following constitute exonerating conditions of responsibility for infringements:
a) Force majeure or fortuitous event duly proven. b) Acting in compliance with a legal duty or the legitimate exercise of the right of defense. c) Mental incapacity duly proven by the competent authority, provided that this affects the ability to understand the infringement. d) Mandatory order of a competent authority, issued in the exercise of its functions. e) Error induced by the Administration or by confusing or illegal administrative provision. f) Voluntary remediation by the possible sanctioned party of the act or omission imputed as constitutive of an administrative infringement, prior to the notification of the charge imputation referred to in item 3) of Article 253. 2.- The following constitute mitigating conditions of responsibility for infringements:
a) If an administrative sanctioning procedure has been initiated and the offender acknowledges their responsibility expressly and in writing.
In cases where the applicable sanction is a fine, it is reduced to an amount no less than half of its value. b) Others that are established by special regulation”. Notified on May 18, 2018.

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market Superintendence
Electronically signed document within the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship

Background

Nº Resolution	Resolved	Finality
Adjunct Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 003-2019-SMV/10	7	Credicorp Capital S.A. Sociedad Administradora de Fondos is sanctioned with a fine of 03 UIT, equivalent to S/ 12,150.00 (Twelve thousand one hundred fifty and 00/100 Soles) for having committed one (01) serious infringement typified in Annex VII, numeral 2, item 2.14 of the Sanctions Regulation for failing to comply with what is provided in article 3 of the Standards Applicable to complaints and claims against entities supervised by the Securities Market Superintendence - SMV, approved by SMV Resolution No. 006-2012-SMV, by not attending the claim of a participant within the timeframe established by the regulations.
Through RSUP No. 064-2020, the appeal filed by Credicorp Capital S.A. Sociedad Administradora de Fondos against the Adjunct Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 003-2019-SMV/10 was declared unfounded.	14/07/2020
iii	Adjunct Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 036-2019-SMV/10	8
---	---	---
iv	Adjunct Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 039-2020-SMV/10	9

38. With regard to recidivism for the commission of the same infringement, the firm sanction imposed by the SMV within the timeframe of one (1) year prior to the commission of the infringement to be sanctioned is taken into account. Within this framework, it must be stated that CREDICORP SAF does not record sanctions for the commission of the same infringement subject of analysis in the present procedure.

The resolution was subject to appeal by CREDICORP SAF. Subsequently, through Superintendent Resolution No. 064-2020-SMV/02, the appeal was declared unfounded.
Notified on July 17, 2019.
9 Notified on October 21, 2020.

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market Superintendence
Electronically signed document within the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship

administrative sanctioning procedure, within the indicated timeframe, so the circumstances that constitute recidivism are not present;

39. Regarding the circumstances of the commission of the infringements, it must be noted that CREDICORP SAF, in its capacity as a company supervised by the SMV, with a functioning authorization granted by CONASEV Resolution No. 053-95-EF/94.10 of January 25, 1995, is aware of the norms regulating the securities market and, in that sense, the provisions contained in the REGULATION, as well as their mandatory compliance, with regard to the case evaluated in the present administrative sanctioning procedure;

40. Nevertheless, CREDICORP SAF did not act with diligence by failing to perform the evaluation and determination of the risk profile of the COMPLAINANTS, prior to the first subscription, as established in article 86-A of the REGULATION. In this sense, it should be indicated that the duty of diligence of the administering society should have directed it to adequately review the regulations applicable to it as an administering society of mutual investment funds in securities, in order to adopt the pertinent measures or actions that would have allowed it to comply with the requirements demanded by the regulations as previously indicated and in this way it would have avoided incurring the infringement subject of the present procedure;

41. Likewise, it must be taken into account that the purpose of determining the risk profile of the potential investor in cases of subscription of mutual funds is to allow the administering society to formulate an individualized recommendation on those funds that adjust to the profile of the future participant, so that this adopts its investment decision with adequate and sufficient information;

42. It must be indicated that through the EXTRAJUDICIAL SETTLEMENT of August 16, 2024, CREDICORP SAF committed to the payment of US$ 37,213.46 to the COMPLAINANTS, for all concepts, including that referred to costs and expenses, payment that would have been made insofar as it is corroborated that the COMPLAINANTS withdrew their complaint before Indecopi. It should be noted that the filing of the complaint before the SMV was made on January 02, 2024, that is, on a date prior to the EXTRAJUDICIAL SETTLEMENT;

43. Regarding the damage caused and the repercussion in the market, it corresponds to point out that considering that the purpose of determining the risk profile of the potential investor implies the subsequent individualized recommendation that will be given to the potential participant on the mutual funds that adjust to their profile so that they take their investment decision with adequate information, the failure to do so, in the cases indicated, prior to the subscription of the mutual funds; implies that said participants adopted investment decisions that do not necessarily adjust to their risk profile which in the short or long term could indicate some possibility of affecting their investments; which, according to what was stated by the COMPLAINANTS, occurred in the present case. However, it must be considered that through the EXTRAJUDICIAL SETTLEMENT, CREDICORP SAF compensated said losses to their satisfaction;

44. Regarding the illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infringement, it must be noted that it has not been proven that CREDICORP SAF obtained an illicit benefit as a result of having incurred the infringement subject of analysis in the present administrative sanctioning procedure;

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market Superintendence
Electronically signed document within the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship

45. With regard to the probability of detection of the infringements, it must be indicated that the constitutive fact of the infringement committed by CREDICORP SAF was evidenced from the complaint filed by the COMPLAINANTS, who informed the omission in the evaluation of their risk profile prior to the subscription of shares in the funds administered by the society. Therefore, it is considered that the probability of detection of the infringements was low;

46. Regarding the gravity of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal good, as has been exposed in the present sanctioning procedure, it must be taken into account that, considering that the purpose of determining the risk profile of the potential investor implies the subsequent individualized recommendation that will be given to the potential participant on the mutual funds that adjust to their profile so that they take their investment decision with due information, the failure to do so prior to the subscription of the mutual funds, implies that said participants adopted investment decisions that do not necessarily adjust to their risk profile and trusting in the administering society in the compliance with the regulations applicable to them as it is an authorized company by the SMV; in such a way that it affects legal goods such as investor protection and market integrity, creating distrust in the same;

47. Likewise, it must be noted that the obligation established in article 86-A of the REGULATION is one of the obligations that the administering society must comply with in the administration of mutual funds, considering furthermore that it constitutes a fiduciary obligation, so the administering society must carry out its activities complying with the norms applicable to it in order to avoid that the confidence of the market participants is deteriorated. In such a way that, by not observing what is provided in the applicable regulations, it not only affects the confidence that investors can have in mutual fund administering societies in the diligent development of their activities in the securities market, but also affects the legal goods related to the protection of the mutual fund industry and duties of the administering society to manage its activity prudently, caring for the interests of the participants as if they were their own;

48. Additionally, with regard to the exemption of liability contained in the subscription requests for participation shares of the funds subject of complaint, in which it was stated that investors would have consented that in the event that their investment decision does not adjust to their risk profile, they release CREDICORP SAF and the Placement Agents from all responsibility, it must be indicated that article 1398° of the Civil Code establishes that in contracts of adhesion and in general contracting clauses not approved administratively, stipulations that establish, in favor of who drafted them, among others, exemptions or limitations of liability are not valid;

49. Regarding the existence or not of intent in the conduct of the offender, it has not been evidenced that CREDICORP SAF acted with intent in the commission of the infringements, subject of analysis in the present administrative sanctioning procedure;

50. In addition to the above, it corresponds to analyze the exemptions and mitigating circumstances of liability established in article 257° of the TUO OF THE LPAG, as well as the mitigating and exempting conditions of liability established in articles 26° and 27° of the SANCTIONS REGULATION;

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market Superintendence
Electronically signed document within the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship

51. In this regard, in accordance with what is determined in article 27°10 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, in concordance with article 257, numeral 1 of the TUO OF THE LPAG, it is not observed that in the present case any of the circumstances that constitute conditions exempting liability with respect to the infringements analyzed have been configured;

52. With regard to the acknowledgment of the offender's liability and the contribution to the clarification of the infringement, established in article 26°11, letter a) and b) of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, in concordance with what is provided in article 257°, numeral 2, item a) of the TUO LPAG, it must be indicated that, CREDICORP SAF has acknowledged its liability for the infringement incurred, expressly and in writing, within the timeframe granted for the presentation of defenses, and in a precise, concise, clear and unconditional manner, without ambiguous or contradictory expressions, as well as has contributed to the clarification of the same; therefore, according to what is established in the aforementioned article 26°, letter a), numeral 1 and fourth paragraph of the same article, it would correspond to reduce the amount of the applicable fine by fifty percent (50%);

53. From what has been stated, it is concluded that CREDICORP SAF has incurred the commission of one (1) infringement qualified as serious; as established in Annex VII, numeral 2, item 2.9 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01; according to which it constitutes an infringement: “Not to comply with the obligations and functions that correspond to it in accordance with what is established in the fund participation regulation, or simplified prospectus of the fund or in the contracts that on behalf of the fund are celebrated with the participants and with third parties or that are established in the regulations.”

10 “Article 27.- EXEMPTIONS OF LIABILITY FOR INFRINGEMENTS” The following constitute conditions exempting liability for infringements:
a) Force majeure, fortuitous event or other exceptional situation that, in the opinion of the SMV, is comparable to a duly proven fortuitous event or force majeure. b) Acting in compliance with a legal duty or the legitimate exercise of a right of defense. c) Mental incapacity duly proven by the competent authority, provided that this affects the aptitude to understand the infringement. d) Mandatory order of a competent authority, issued in the exercise of its functions. e) Error induced by the Administration or by confusing or illegal administrative provision. f) Voluntary remediation by the possible sanctioned party of the act or omission imputed as constitutive of an administrative infringement, prior to the notification of the imputation of charges referred to in item 3) of article 253 of the LPAG and provided that no communication demanding the fulfillment of the obligation had been sent.”

“Article 26.- MITIGATING CONDITIONS OF LIABILITY FOR INFRINGEMENTS The following constitute mitigating conditions of liability for infringements:
a) Acknowledgment of the offender's liability in an express and written manner, once the administrative sanctioning procedure has been initiated.
When the applicable sanction is a fine, it is reduced, taking into account the following:

1. If the acknowledgment of the infringement is presented within the timeframe granted for the presentation of defenses, the reduction amount will be fifty percent (50%).
2. If the acknowledgment is presented after the expiration of the timeframe granted for the presentation of defenses and before the expiration of the timeframe granted to formulate allegations to the instruction report, the reduction amount will be thirty percent (30%).
3. If the acknowledgment is presented after the expiration of the timeframe granted to formulate allegations to the instruction report and until before the issuance of the sanction resolution, the reduction amount will be ten percent (10%).
   The acknowledgment of liability with respect to an infringement must be made in a precise, concise, clear, express and unconditional manner, and must not contain ambiguous or contradictory expressions; otherwise, it will not be understood as an acknowledgment. If defenses are presented, despite having made an acknowledgment of liability, it will be understood as a non-acknowledgment, and the authority will proceed to evaluate the defenses. b) Contribution of the offender to the clarification of the infringement. c) Remediation carried out after its request or the initiation of the administrative sanctioning procedure.”

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market Superintendence
Electronically signed document within the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship

54. Therefore, it would correspond to impose on said administering society a sanction in accordance with what is established in article 34° of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, which establishes that serious infringements are sanctioned with a fine not less than twenty-five (25) and up to fifty (50) UIT or with the suspension of the functioning authorization for up to (20) days;

55. However, considering that CREDICORP SAF has acknowledged the commission of the infringement subject of charge, and has contributed to the clarification of the same; it corresponds to apply what is provided by article 26°, letters a), numeral 1) and b) of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, so the fine for the infringement must fluctuate between 12.5 UIT and 25 UIT; that is, 50% of the range established for serious infringements;

56. On the other hand, considering what has been stated in the analyzed sanctioning criteria, and in application of the Principle of Reasonableness contemplated in article 248°, numeral 3 of the TUO LPAG, which states that the sanctions to be applied must be proportional to the non-compliance qualified as an infringement, it must be considered that, the infringement committed by CREDICORP SAF did not generate economic prejudice to the participants in the market, nor repercussion in the securities market system, as well as that it does not record recidivism in the commission of the infringement;

57. In that sense, considering what has been stated, this Adjunct Superintendence considers that it is possible to impose on CREDICORP SAF a sanction corresponding to a classification lower than that provided for serious infringements, according to what is stated in the third paragraph of article 25°12 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION; so it is applicable a sanction corresponding to minor infringements, according to what is established in article 35° of the SANCTIONS REGULATION;

Being in accordance with what is provided by articles 32°, numeral 16, of the Organization and Functions Regulation of the SMV, approved by Supreme Decree No. 216-2011-EF and its amendments.

RESOLVES:

Article 1º.- Declare that Credicorp Capital S.A.
Sociedad Administradora de Fondos has incurred one (1) infringement qualified as serious as established in Annex VII, numeral 2, item 2.9 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01, for failing to determine the risk profile of participants.

Article 2º.- Sanction Credicorp Capital S.A.
Sociedad Administradora de Fondos with a fine amounting to two (2) UIT, equivalent to S/ 8,800.00 (Eight thousand eight hundred and 00/100 Soles) for what is provided in the
article 1° of this resolution.

Article 3º.- This resolution does not exhaust the administrative
path, unless it is consented, it may be challenged before the

“Article 25°.- Sanctioning Criteria
(...)
When, from the evaluation of the aforementioned criteria, it is observed that there is no proportionality between the sanction to be imposed and the imputed facts, by exception and through a reasoned resolution, a sanction may be imposed corresponding to a classification lower than that provided.”

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market Superintendence
Electronically signed document within the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship

Adjunct Superintendent of Prudential Supervision by filing the reconsideration or appeal resource presented before the same, within the timeframe of fifteen (15) business days counted from the day following its notification.

Article 4º.- In the event that this resolution is not
subject to challenge through reconsideration or appeal resource within the timeframe of fifteen (15) business days of being notified and becomes final, it must be published on the SMV Institutional Page in the Unique Digital Platform of the Peruvian State (www.gob.pe/smv), in observance of what is provided by numeral 1, article 7° of the Policy on diffusion of normative projects, general character legal norms, early agenda and other administrative acts of the SMV, approved by Resolution SMV No. 014-2014-SMV/01 and its amendment, and by what is provided in article 14° of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01.

Article 5º.- Transcribe this resolution to
Credicorp Capital S.A. Sociedad Administradora de Fondos.
Register, communicate and publish.

Omar Gutiérrez Ochoa
Adjunct Superintendent
Adjunct Superintendence of Prudential Supervision

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market Superintendence
Electronically signed document within the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship

ANNEX – DESIGNATIONS

Person	Designation
Karen Majlí Vega Coronel de Theus,
Victor Santiago Vega Velezmoro and
Reyna Fabiola Coronel Rengifo de Vega	COMPLAINANTS