Adjunct Superintendent of Market Conduct Supervision Resolution No. 007-2025-SMV/11

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law on Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship Adjunct Superintendent of Market Conduct Supervision Resolution No. 007-2025-SMV/11 Lima, January 17, 2025 Subject: Sanction Córdova, Petrozzi, Coronado Civil Society of Limited Responsibility (Formerly, Pierrend, Gómez & Associates Civil Society of Limited Responsibility) with a (01) reprimand for having committed a (01) minor infringement classified in clause 3.6, item 3 of Annex I of the Sanctions Regulation. Administered Entity: CÓRDOVA, PETROZZI, CORONADO CIVIL SOCIETY OF LIMITED RESPONSIBILITY (FORMERLY, PIERREND, GÓMEZ & ASSOCIATES CIVIL SOCIETY OF LIMITED RESPONSIBILITY) Subject: Administrative Sanctioning Procedure of double administrative instance Main Type: Clause 3.6 of item 3 of Annex I of the Sanctions Regulation MINOR INFRACTION File No.: 2024038470 The Adjunct Superintendent of Market Conduct Supervision SEEN:
The administrative file No. 2024038470 containing the administrative sanctioning procedure initiated by the General Superintendent of Conduct Compliance of the Securities Market Superintendence – SMV (hereinafter, the IGCC), against Córdova, Petrozzi, Coronado Civil Society of Limited Responsibility (Formerly, Pierrend, Gómez & Associates Civil Society of Limited Responsibility) (hereinafter, SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova); as well as Report No. 1611-2024-SMV/11.2 of December 3, 2024 (hereinafter, the Report), issued by said IGCC;

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law on Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship CONSIDERING:
I. FUNCTION AND COMPETENCE OF THE SASCM

1. That, the IGCC – the instructing body of the administrative sanctioning procedures (hereinafter, the PAS) referred to in this case – has brought to the knowledge of the Adjunct Superintendence of Market Conduct Supervision of the SMV (hereinafter, SASCM), the PAS of administrative file No. 2024038470 with the aim that it issues a decision as the first-instance administrative sanctioning body for the case of infringements against securities market regulations. In this way, the SASCM assumes competence in observance of the exercise of the supervision function and the sanctioning power of the SMV, established through the Concorded Single Text of its Organic Law, Decree Law No. 26126 (hereinafter, LOSMV) and the Ordered Single Text of the Securities Market Law, Legislative Decree No. 861, approved by Supreme Decree No. 020-2023-EF1
   (hereinafter, TUO LMV); as well as by what is provided in the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01 (hereinafter, Sanctions Regulation); and in articles 42 and 43 of the Organization and Functions Regulation of the SMV, approved by Supreme Decree No. 216-2011-EF (hereinafter, ROF-SMV), in the sense that it is a specific function of the SASCM to impose sanctions in first-instance administrative proceedings for the commission of infringements whose compliance control corresponds to said Adjunct Superintendence. Likewise, the SASCM has the powers to issue corrective measures aimed at reversing the situation altered by the commission of the infringement;
   II. FACTS, CHARGES AND DEFENSES OF THE ADMINISTERED ENTITY
   2.1 Fact
2. That, it was evaluated whether SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, complied with its obligation to present documentation or information requested by the SMV;
   2.2 Charge
3. That, as a result of said evaluation, through Letter No. 4174-2024-SMV/11.2 of October 11, 2024 (hereinafter, the Charge Letter), the following charge was formulated:
   In the framework of compliance supervision actions of the International Auditing Standards (NIA), in the audit performed on the separate and consolidated annual financial statements corresponding to the 2021 fiscal year of the company GR Holding S.A., the General Superintendent of Conduct Supervision (hereinafter, IGSC) through Letter No. 417-2022-SMV/11.1 notified on January 31, 2022, requested SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, to comply with sending the information described in said letter, having been granted a deadline until February 18, 2022; however, it did not comply with attending said request, for which it deserved that through Letter No. 880-2022-SMV/11.1, notified on March 8, 2022, the IGSC reiterated its request so that within five (05) business days of being notified of said letter, it complies with attending the information request; nevertheless,

1 Through Supreme Decree No. 020-2023-EF, published on February 10, 2023 in the Official Gazette El Peruano, the Ordered Single Text of the Securities Market Law, Legislative Decree No. 861, was approved.

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law on Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, did not comply with attending the formulated request.
Accordingly, SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, would not have complied with attending the information request formulated by the SMV through Letter No. 417-2022-SMV/11.1;
4. That, the presentation within the indicated deadline of the documentation or information requested by the SMV, is classified in clause 3.6 of item 3 of Annex I of the Sanctions Regulation;
2.3 Defenses
5. That, through a written submission of October 23, 2024, SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, presented its defenses, indicating the following:
“As shown in the charges attached to Letter 4994-2021, the requests received with Letters No. 417-2022-SMV/11 and 880-2022-SMV/11.1 have the reception stamp of our Firm; however, in the characteristics of the domicile of the Notification Certificate No. 2022001943 and 2022004222 it is indicated that they were received on the 15th floor and 20th floor.
On the other hand, due to the pandemic, staff was working remotely, returning to in-person work only in January 2023, as shown in the attached Memo and email.
It is important to mention that on those dates our office, located on the 5th floor, which is our fiscal domicile and where notification should have taken place, was closed; and we understand that, due to the reception stamp on the documents, they must have been received by staff from another company belonging to the BDO group, located on the 12th or 14th floor (and not on the 15th or 20th, as mentioned in the first point). We must also understand that, unfortunately, the staff that received the documents, which should have corresponded to security, did not follow the instructions for the treatment and delivery of documents, which is why they did not reach our possession. Taking into consideration that many companies were working remotely due to the pandemic, communications were mostly received digitally, which did not happen on this occasion, as we reviewed our electronic inbox in the SMV Virtual System and we have no received document, as shown in Annex B. We request that the special circumstances indicated above be taken into consideration at the time of its evaluation (...). Also, we attach the requested information.”;
6. That, through Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS, the Ordered Single Text of the General Administrative Procedure Law, Law No. 27444 (hereinafter, TUO of the LPAG), was approved, which contains common rules for the actions of the State's administrative function and regulates all administrative procedures developed in the entities, including special procedures. Likewise, item 3) of article 248 of the TUO of the LPAG, indicates the criteria regarding the graduation of the sanction: (a) The illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infringement, (b) The probability of detection of the infringement, (c) The severity of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal good, (d) The economic harm 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 final, (f) The circumstances of the commission of the infringement, and (g) The existence or non-existence of intent in the infringer's conduct;
7. That, the formulated charge and the criteria regarding the graduation of the sanction have been the subject of evaluation in the Report, which has been brought to the knowledge of the SASCM;
8. That, in observance of what is provided by item 5 of article 255 of the TUO of the LPAG, through Letter No. 5476-2024-SMV/11 of December 3, 2024, the Report was sent to SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, so that it formulates its allegations within a deadline of five (5) business days;
9. That, through a written submission of December 10, 2024, SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, informed acceptance of the reprimand sanction proposed by the IGCC in the Report;
III. MATTERS TO BE DETERMINED
10. That, in the present PAS it corresponds to determine the following:
(i) Whether SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, incurred or did not incur the infringement indicated in the Charge Letter and Report; (ii) Whether it corresponds or does not correspond to impose a sanction on SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova;
IV. ANALYSIS
4.1 Applicable Normativity
11. That, article 1 of the Concorded Single Text of the Organic Law of the SMV, approved by Decree Law No. 26126 and its modifying norms (hereinafter, Organic Law of the SMV), states that the SMV has as its function: “(...) supervise the compliance of international auditing standards by auditing societies enabled by a college of public accountants of Peru and contracted by natural or legal persons subject to the supervision of the SMV in compliance with the norms under its competence, for which it may issue general dispositions concordant with said international auditing standards and request any information or documentation to verify such compliance.(...)”. (Underline added);
12. That, likewise, the penultimate paragraph of item 7, article 3 of the Organic Law of the SMV, establishes, among others, that: “(...). In the framework of the celebration of agreements and/or for the fulfillment of its institutional purposes, the SMV as the securities market authority may, within or outside an investigation or inspection, request any auditing society, the documentation related to the audit or review of financial statements that they have performed, including copies of any information or documentation related to this service, from any legal person or autonomous patrimony, even if they do not participate in the securities market. (...)”. (Underline added);
13. That, clause 3.6 of item 3 of Annex I of the

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law on Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship Sanctions Regulation, establishes as a minor infringement: “Present outside the established deadline, or not present, the documentation or information, other than that indicated in the preceding item 3.1 to which they are obligated by the regulations or by request of the SMV or not send it according to the technical specifications, when applicable, or send it incompletely”. (Underline added);
14. That, according to article 35 of the Sanctions Regulation, minor infringements are sanctionable with a reprimand or a fine not less than one (1) UIT and up to twenty-five (25) UIT;
4.2 Evaluation of the case
15. That, in the administrative file No.
2024038470, which contains the documentation of the present PAS, it is appreciated that through Report No. 1021-2024-SMV/11.1 of August 1, 2024 (File No.
2022023495), the IGSC – the body of the SMV that has within its functions and powers, the supervision of compliance with the norms applicable to auditing societies contracted by companies with securities registered in the RPMV, evaluating the indications of possible infringements, and sends, for its consideration, the reports of indications of infringement respectively, to the IGCC – sent to the IGCC, the result of its evaluation, and specifically what refers to the present case;
16. That, it must be kept in mind that the procedures and legal forms with which the IGSC conducts its inspection and/or supervision activity and upon concluding it with a report of indications of infringement, determine that its pronouncement or opinion on a specific supervision topic – which can even contain a decision, such as, for example, the adoption of corrective measures – is an opinion on the merits of the matter; it must be specified that said opinion and the report of indications of infringement of the IGSC, is not binding for the IGCC, as established in the second paragraph of article 9 of the Sanctions Regulation 23 ;
17. That, in this way it is had that in the evaluation of the facts related to the present PAS have intervened and participated previously to the issuance of this Resolution, two (2) other administrative bodies of the SMV,

2 In article 245 of the TUO of the LPAG it is indicated as forms or modes in which the inspection activity could conclude the following: 1) Certificate of conformity of the activity developed by the administered entity; 2) Recommendation of improvements or corrections of the activity developed by the administered entity; 3) The warning of the existence of non-compliances not susceptible of meriting the determination of administrative responsibilities; 4) The recommendation of the initiation of a procedure with the aim of determining the administrative responsibilities that correspond; 5) The adoption of corrective measures and 6) Other forms as established by special laws. 3 «Article 9.- PRELIMINARY INQUIRIES AS A CONSEQUENCE OF SUPERVISION ACTIONS (...) When said bodies conclude that there are sufficient indications of possible administrative infringements they send the corresponding reports to the General Superintendencies of Compliance, which determine whether it corresponds to initiate or not an administrative sanctioning procedure. If so, the General Superintendencies of Compliance may carry out additional inspections or investigations of the reported indications. In the case of possible infringements in the scope of the Regulation of the Participatory Financial Financing Activity and its Managing Societies, the preliminary inquiries are carried out by the General Superintendent of Investigation and Innovation, a dependency that if there are sufficient indications of possible administrative infringements will determine whether it corresponds to initiate or not an administrative sanctioning procedure. (...).».

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law on Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship functionally independent from each other and from this Office; first the IGSC which at its time reported the indications of infringement and then the IGCC which, as a result of its evaluation, formulated the Charge Letter and the Report; and at this point of the PAS it corresponds to the Office of the SASCM to issue a pronouncement containing its decision regarding the mentioned charges, it being precise to indicate that by the nature of the same, as previously stated, it will be a first-instance administrative decision;
18. That, SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, in its defenses indicates that Letters No. 417-2022-SMV/11.1 and 880-
2022-SMV/11.1 were not notified in their offices, located at Camino Real Avenue No. 456, Real Tower, 5th Floor, but that said documents were notified on floors 12 and 14, respectively, by staff from another company belonging to the BDO group.
19. That, regarding this, it corresponds to indicate that the notification made to SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, was validly carried out in accordance with what is provided in the regime of personal notification established in article 21 of the TUO of the LPAG. Therefore, what is stated by SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, lacks support, since the notification charges of Letters No. 417-2022-SMV/11 and 880-2022-SMV/11.1 have the stamp of RECEIVED by their auditing firm, as appreciated below in Image No. 1:
Image No. 1: Notification charge of Letter No. No. 417-2022-SMV/11 Image No.2: Notification charge of Letter No. No. 880-2022-SMV/11.1

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law on Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship
20. That, likewise, regarding its argument that “(...) the staff that received the documents that should have corresponded to security, did not follow the instructions for the treatment and delivery of documents, which is why they did not reach our possession (...)”, it corresponds to point out that what is indicated only evidences the lack of diligence on the part of SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, who should have taken the necessary precautions with the staff in charge of receiving notifications so that it can take knowledge of the mentioned letters and give them attention in a timely manner;
21. That, on the other hand, SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, has attended in an untimely manner and within the present administrative sanctioning procedure, the information request formulated through Letters No. 417-2022-SMV/11.1, and reiterated through Letter No.
880-2022-SMV/11.1, with which it is considered that SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova, has remedied its infringing conduct, which is considered as an attenuating factor of responsibility, as established in clause c) of article 26 of the Sanctions Regulation;
22. That, therefore, the conduct constitutive of the infringement contained in the imputed charge has been proven and the administrative responsibility of SOA Pierrend, Gómez, today named SOA Córdova is determined, for which reason, it corresponds to analyze the sanction proposal in attention to what is provided by the principle of reasonableness and to the sanction criteria, which will be evaluated in the following section;
V. DETERMINATION OF THE SANCTION
23. That, the non-compliance with the presentation within the indicated deadline, of the documentation or information requested by the SMV, is classified in clause 3.6 of item 3 of Annex I of the Sanctions Regulation, which states that it constitutes a minor infringement: “Present outside the established deadline, or not present, the documentation or information, other than that indicated in the preceding item 3.1 to which they are obligated by the regulations or by request of the SMV or not send it according to the technical specifications, when applicable, or send it incompletely”. (Underline added);
24. That, according to article 35 of the Sanctions Regulation, minor infringements are sanctionable with a reprimand or a fine not

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendency of the Securities Market
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship less than one (1) UIT and up to twenty-five (25) UIT;
25. That, for the purpose of analyzing the corresponding sanction for this type of non-compliance, the provisions of Article 25 of the Sanctions Regulation must be taken into account; in this sense, the following are analyzed: (i) the sanctioning history; (ii) recidivism, for the commission of the same infraction within a period of one (1) year from when the resolution sanctioning the first infraction became final; the harm caused and its repercussion on the market; (iii) the circumstances of the commission of the infraction; (iv) the economic harm caused and its repercussion on the market; (v) the illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infraction; (vi) the probability of detection of the infraction; (vii) the seriousness of the damage to the public interest and/or the protected legal good; and, (viii) the existence or non-existence of intent in the infringer's conduct, in accordance with what is provided in numeral 3) of Article 248 of the TUO of the LPAG and Article 348 of the LMV;

SANCTIONING CRITERIA
26. That, regarding the seriousness of the damage to the public interest and/or the protected legal good, it must be indicated that the submission of documentation or information requested by the SMV constitutes a fundamental obligation in the transparency of the securities market, since this seeks to guarantee that market participants make their investment decisions adequately informed. Likewise, the lack of attention to the requirements formulated by the SMV affects the SMV's supervisory work. Consequently, although no seriousness of damage to the public interest is evidenced, the non-compliance with the obligation to inform the market within the deadline limits by participants affects the transparency of the market, which is considered a protected legal good;
27. That, regarding the sanctioning history, it has been verified that the Auditing Firm Pierrend, Gómez, now called Auditing Firm Córdova, does not have a sanctioning history, within the terms referred to in literal a) of Article 25 of the Sanctions Regulation, which establishes that the infringer's history consists of sanctions imposed by the SMV that became final within the four (4) years prior to the moment of the commission of the infraction to be sanctioned;
28. That, regarding recidivism for the commission of the same infraction, it has been verified that there is no recidivism on the part of the Auditing Firm Pierrend, Gómez, now called Auditing Firm Córdova, within the terms referred to in literal b) of Article 25 of the Sanctions Regulation, which provides that there is recidivism for the commission of the same infraction within a period of one (01) year from when the resolution sanctioning the first infraction became final;
29. That, regarding the circumstances of the commission of the infraction, it is worth noting that the Auditing Firm Pierrend, Gómez, now called Auditing Firm Córdova, has corrected its conduct by attending the information request formulated by the SMV through Office No. 417-2022-SMV/11.1 in the present PAS;
30. That, regarding the economic harm caused and its repercussion on the market, it has not been evidenced that the aforementioned non-compliance has produced quantifiable harm, understood as economic damage caused to one or several investors;

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendency of the Securities Market
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship
31. That, regarding the illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infraction, it has not been proven that the infraction incurred by Auditing Firm Pierrend, Gómez, now called Auditing Firm Córdova, has generated an illegal benefit;
32. That, on the other hand, regarding the probability of detection of the infraction, it must be noted that to detect this type of non-compliance, the SMV has carried out various actions, among them, the diligence of substantiation of working papers and issuing various offices of information request, therefore, there is a low probability of detection of non-compliance in the submission of documentation or information requested by the SMV;
33. That, regarding the existence or non-existence of intent in the infringer's conduct, it has not been evidenced by this non-compliance that the Auditing Firm Pierrend, Gómez, now called Auditing Firm Córdova, has acted intentionally or fraudulently;
34. That, in attention to the Sanctioning Criteria and the evaluation carried out by this Deputy Superintendency, it corresponds to impose on Auditing Firm Pierrend, Gómez, now called Auditing Firm Córdova, a sanction of one (01) admonition;
35. That, it corresponds to note that any auditing firm that provides services to legal entities participating in the securities market is subject to the obligations and duties set forth in the regulations that govern this market; therefore, any information request made by the competent bodies must be attended to within the established deadlines, in order to ensure better transparency of the securities market, and;

Being in accordance with what is provided in numerals 13 and 36 of Article 43 of the Regulation of Organization and Functions of the Superintendency of the Securities Market, approved by Supreme Decree No. 216-2011-EF;

RESOLVES:
Article 1st.- Declare that the Auditing Firm Córdova, Petrozzi, Coronado Civil Society of Limited Liability (Formerly, Pierrend, Gómez & Associates Civil Society of Limited Liability) has incurred one (1) infraction of a minor nature typified in clause 3.6 of numeral 3 of Annex I of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01, for having attended the information request formulated by the SMV through Office No. 417-2022-SMV/11.1 in an untimely manner during the present administrative sanctioning procedure.

Article 2nd.- Sanction the Auditing Firm Córdova, Petrozzi, Coronado Civil Society of Limited Liability (Formerly, Pierrend, Gómez & Associates Civil Society of Limited Liability) with one (01) admonition, for what is provided in Article 1 of this Resolution.

Article 3rd.- This Resolution does not exhaust the administrative route, it may be challenged before this Deputy Superintendency of Market Conduct Supervision by filing a reconsideration or appeal resource, an administrative resource recognized in Article 218 of the Single Consolidated Text of Law No. 27444, General Administrative Procedure Law, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS, within a period of fifteen

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendency of the Securities Market
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship (15) business days counted from the day following its notification, as it is a procedure of double administrative instance.

Article 4th.- In case this Resolution is not subject to challenge, it must be published on the “SMV Institutional Page on the Unified Digital Platform of the Peruvian State for Citizen Orientation (www.gob.pe/smv)”, in observance of what is provided in numeral 1 of Article 7 of the “Policy on dissemination of normative projects, general character legal norms, early agenda and other administrative acts of the SMV”, approved by SMV Resolution No. 014-2014-SMV/01, and by what is provided in the last paragraph of Article 14 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01.

Article 5th.- Transcribe this Resolution to the Auditing Firm Córdova, Petrozzi, Coronado Civil Society of Limited Liability (Formerly, Pierrend, Gómez & Associates Civil Society of Limited Liability).

Register, communicate and publish.

Carlos Rivero Zevallos
Deputy Superintendent
Deputy Superintendency of Market Conduct Supervision