Adjunct Superintendent of Prudential Supervision Resolution No. 009-2025-SMV/10 — SMV — PE

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market Superintendency
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 authorship Adjunct Superintendent of Prudential Supervision Resolution No. 009-2025-SMV/10 Lima, February 11, 2025 Subject: HMC Asset Management S.A.
Investment Fund Management Company is sanctioned with two (2) warnings for having committed two (2) minor infractions typified in Annex I, numeral 3, item 3.1 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, for failing to present occasional information within the deadline established by the applicable regulations.
Administered by: HMC Asset Management S.A. Investment Fund Management Company Subject: Administrative sanctioning procedure File No.: 2024050682

The Adjunct Superintendent of Prudential Supervision

SEEN:

The administrative file No. 2024050682, and Report No. 115-2025-SMV/10.3, issued by the General Intendancy of Prudential Compliance; as well as the defenses presented by HMC Asset Management S.A. Investment Fund Management Company; and,

CONSIDERING:

Pursuant to Article 1 of Law No. 29782, Law on the Strengthening of the Supervision of the Securities Market, the name of the National Commission for the Supervision of Companies and Securities (CONASEV) is replaced by that of the Securities Market Superintendency (SMV), so that any reference to CONASEV in legal norms shall be understood as referring to the SMV;

I. FACTS

Within the supervisory functions assigned to the SMV, an evaluation was carried out regarding the timely presentation of occasional information by HMC Asset Management S.A. Investment Fund Management Company (hereinafter, HMC SAFI);
As a result of said evaluation and under the authority of the provisions of the Single Text of the General Administrative Procedure Law, Law No. 27444, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS (hereinafter, TUO LPAG), through Office No. 5575-2024-SMV/10.3, notified on December 12, 2024 (hereinafter, CHARGES OFFICE), charges were filed against HMC SAFI for infractions of the Regulation on Investment Funds and their Management Companies, approved by SMV Resolution No. 029-2014-SMV/01 (hereinafter, REGULATION) and the Regulation on Important Events and Confidential Information, approved by SMV Resolution No. 005-2014-SMV/01 and its amendments (hereinafter, RHI), in force at the time the facts occurred, for not timely presenting the following information:

a) The important event referred to the agreements adopted in the General Assembly of Participants of the investment fund named “HMC Crédito Perú II (PEN) Fund, FI”, which occurred on May 26, 2022, regarding the election of members of the Surveillance Committee. This event should have been communicated to the RPMV on the day it occurred; however, it was informed on May 27, 2022 1;

b) The important event referred to the agreements adopted in the General Assembly of Participants of the investment fund named “HMC Crédito Perú II (USD) Fund, FI”, which occurred on May 26, 2022, regarding the election of members of the Surveillance Committee. This event should have been communicated to the RPMV on the day it occurred; however, it was informed on May 27, 2022 2;

The aforementioned non-compliances are typified in Annex I, numeral 3, item 3.1 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01 (hereinafter, SANCTIONS REGULATION), which prescribes as a minor infraction: “To present outside the established deadline, or to do so incompletely, or, without observing the technical specifications approved by the SMV or without communicating the approval by the corresponding corporate body, to the SMV, to the Stock Exchange, to the entity in charge of the centralized negotiation mechanism or to any other entity or subject of the securities market, the audited individual or consolidated financial information, the individual or consolidated interim financial statements, management report, special audit report, important events, and annual reports”;
In writing received on December 20, 2024, HMC SAFI presented its defenses regarding the observations made;
The charges filed, as well as the defenses presented by HMC SAFI, have been the subject of evaluation by the General Intendancy of Prudential Compliance in Report No. 115-2025-SMV/10.3, which has been submitted to the knowledge of this Adjunct Superintendency;
In observance of the Principle of Due Process contemplated in Article IV, item 1, numeral 1.2 of the Preliminary Title, as well as in Article 248, numeral 2, of the TUO LPAG, through Office No. 440-2025-SMV/10, the administrative file to which this resolution refers was made available to HMC SAFI for review;

II. ISSUES TO BE DETERMINED

In the present administrative procedure, in the opinion of this Adjunct Superintendency, it corresponds to determine the following:

1 File No. 2022022894.
2 File No. 2022022896.

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

a. Whether HMC SAFI incurred or did not incur an infraction for not communicating the important event referred to the agreements adopted in the General Assembly of Participants of the investment fund named “HMC Crédito Perú II (PEN) Fund, FI”, which occurred on May 26, 2022 - regarding the election of members of the Surveillance Committee - subject to charges, within the deadline established in Article 9, numeral 9.1 of the RHI, in force at the date the facts occurred.

b. Whether HMC SAFI incurred or did not incur an infraction for not communicating the important event referred to the agreements adopted in the General Assembly of Participants of the investment fund named “HMC Crédito Perú II (USD) Fund, FI”, which occurred on May 26, 2022 - regarding the election of members of the Surveillance Committee - subject to charges, within the deadline established in Article 9, numeral 9.1 of the RHI, in force at the date the facts occurred.

c. Whether it corresponds or does not correspond to impose a sanction on HMC SAFI;

III. ANALYSIS

3.1 On the applicable regulations

Article 140 of the REGULATION provides the following regarding important events:

“Article 140.- Subject to the Regulation on Important Events The Management Company is governed by the Regulation on Important Events and the provisions on the matter issued by the SMV.
The Management Company has the obligation to inform the Registry of important events regarding the Management Company and the Funds it manages while it maintains Funds registered in the Registry.”;

Likewise, Article 141 of the REGULATION qualifies as an important event the variations in the members of the surveillance committee, according to the following:

“Article 141.- Important Events and Disclosure Without prejudice to what is stated in the preceding article, the following qualify as important events referred to in Article 28 of the Securities Market Law:
(...) d) Variations in the members of the Surveillance Committee.
(...)
The events indicated in the preceding article and this article must be informed to the Registry in accordance with what is established in the Regulation on Important Events (...).”;

In this sense, Article 7, numerals 7.2 and 7.3 of the RHI provides the following:

“Article 7.- Obligation to Inform
(...)

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

7.2. Important events must be sent complying with the technical specifications approved by the SMV. The Issuer must ensure that in the sending of the information there is coherence between the content of the same and the classification or typology existing in the MVNet.
7.3. The obligation to inform an important event will only be understood as fulfilled if the Issuer has observed the requirements established in this Regulation and in the corresponding technical specifications established by the SMV.
(...);”;

Regarding the timeliness for informing said important events, Article 9, numeral 9.1 of the RHI refers to the following:

“Article 9.- Timeliness for informing important events
9.1. The Issuer must inform its important event as soon as such event occurs or the Issuer takes knowledge of it, and in no case later than the day it has occurred or has been known. This information must be communicated to the SMV before any other person, entity or means of dissemination, and simultaneously when it corresponds to the Stock Exchange or to the entity administering the respective centralized negotiation mechanism. This, regardless of whether the information has been generated or not within the Issuer itself;
(...);”;

3.2. On the charges filed

Through the CHARGES OFFICE, charges were filed against HMC SAFI for not communicating, within the deadline established by the regulations, the occasional information indicated in the third consideration of this resolution;

3.3. On the defenses presented

In response to the charges made, through a document presented on December 20, 2024, HMC SAFI expressly, precisely, concisely, clearly and unconditionally acknowledges having committed the infractions imputed in the CHARGES OFFICE, in accordance with what is established in letter a) of Article 26 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION. Likewise, it requests that the mentioned recognition be taken into consideration, and if a fine is applied, that a reduction of fifty percent (50%) be taken into account, in accordance with the aforementioned Article 26 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION;
Likewise, for the purposes of applying sanctioning criteria, in accordance with what is established in Article 25 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, HMC SAFI specifies that according to item 1.4 of Article IV of the Preliminary Title of the Single Text of Law No. 27444, General Administrative Procedure Law, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS (hereinafter, TUO LPAG), under the principle of reasonableness, the decisions of the administration that qualify infractions and impose sanctions must be within the limits of the legally attributed faculty and be proportional between the means to be employed and the public ends to be protected, in order to respond to what is strictly necessary;
Likewise, HMC SAFI points out that item 3 of Article 248 of the TUO LPAG, when describing the principle of reasonableness, details that

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

sanctions applied by the authority must be proportional to the non-compliance, observing the graduation criteria;

In concordance with this, HMC SAFI indicates that to comply with the proportionality of the sanction (demanded of the authority based on the principle of reasonableness) the graduation criteria must be observed. It adds that this requirement not only implies the obligation to detail, but must serve as the basis for the analysis of the graduation of the sanction, through the use of a methodology that qualifies and quantifies them and rigorously and in detail grounds the type and amount of the sanction to be imposed, avoiding absolutely discretionary decisions;
HMC SAFI mentions that it is of utmost importance that the sanctioning criteria established in Article 25 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, as well as the criteria applicable to the administrative sanctioning procedure for non-compliance with the regulations regulating the submission of periodic or occasional information, approved by SMV Resolution No. 006-2012-SMV-01 of April 16, 2012, be observed with the greatest care and rigor. Likewise, it points out that in the evaluation there must be maximum observance of the principle of reasonableness;
With reference to the criteria mentioned in the previous consideration, HMC SAFI proceeds to develop the considerations it requests be taken into account when determining the possible sanction;
The administrator indicates that it has no sanctioning record, is not a recidivist, no economic damage has been caused, nor repercussion in the market, it did not obtain any illicit benefit in the commission of the infractions, the probability of detection of the infractions under analysis was high due to the publicity of the date of celebration of the participants' assemblies of the funds and that the commission of the infractions did not imply intentionality;
Regarding the circumstances of the commission of the infraction, the management company mentions that, through its writing, it has expressly recognized its responsibility regarding the imputed infractions, which would constitute a mitigating factor of responsibility that should be taken into account in the determination of the sanction. Likewise, it points out that HMC SAFI did not fail to communicate the important events, and that although the presentation of them was carried out late, the date of presentation was the day after the facts subject to the infraction occurred, which are circumstances that must be valued in accordance with the regulations;
With regard to the gravity of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal good, HMC SAFI manifests that, although the criteria establish that any non-compliance with the regulations on the timely presentation of periodic or occasional information affects transparency in the market, the impact in the case of the imputed infractions would have been minimal, since the important events were presented only one day late. In addition, it mentions that there would also have been no damage to market security or to the protection of investors, as protected legal goods; and, finally, it requests that the minimal gravity of the damage to the public interest and to the protected legal goods be taken into account;
In that sense, HMC SAFI points out that the indicated sanctioning criteria reflect the minimal impact of the imputed infractions, the absence of aggravating factors and the existence of mitigating factors that imply a reduction of the possible sanction to be imposed;
On the other hand, HMC SAFI reiterates its recognition of the imputed infractions in a precise, concise, clear, express and unconditional manner, without presenting ambiguous or contradictory expressions, in accordance with the conditions established in letter a) of Article 26 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION. It also requests to consider, based on all the information it presented to the SMV, and on what was developed in its writing, its contribution to the clarification of the imputed infractions, in accordance with what is established in letter b) of Article 26 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION;
HMC SAFI concludes that the sanction to be imposed should be reduced based on the recognition made, and requests that the application of the sanctioning criteria be taken into account, in accordance with Article 25 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, and what is established in the criteria, as well as the mitigating circumstances of responsibility established in the aforementioned Article 26 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, for the purposes of carrying out an adequate graduation of the corresponding sanction;

3.4 Evaluation of the defenses

This analysis must begin by stating that HMC SAFI has expressly recognized its responsibility in the commission of the infractions imputed in the CHARGES OFFICE. Regarding this, it must be indicated that said recognition will be considered when determining the sanction to be imposed;
Without prejudice to the foregoing, it is necessary to indicate that HMC SAFI is a company supervised by the SMV, with an operating authorization granted by Superintendent Resolution No. 110-2019-SMV/10.2 of September 19, 2019, and has knowledge of the applicable regulations for the presentation of periodic and occasional information, so it has the obligation to comply with what is established in said regulations and therefore to act diligently in the timely presentation of said information. However, this did not occur, since HMC SAFI committed two (2) infractions, subject of the present administrative sanctioning procedure;
In that sense, regarding said infractions, it is necessary to mention that management companies are obliged to present the communication of important events at the time established in Article 9 of the RHI, that is, as soon as the event occurs or is taken knowledge of it, in no case later than the day it has occurred or has been known; however, from the facts, it is appreciated that HMC SAFI presented the occasional information described in letters a) and b) of the third consideration of this Resolution outside the deadline established in the aforementioned Article 9 of the RHI, with a delay of one (1) day;
Consequently, it is observed that HMC SAFI has committed two (2) infractions qualified as minor, typified in Annex I, numeral 3, item 3.1, of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, in force at the date of the commission of the facts, according to which it constitutes an infraction: “To present outside the established deadline, or to do so incompletely, or, without observing the technical specifications approved by the SMV or without communicating the approval by the corresponding corporate body, to the SMV, to the Stock Exchange, to the entity in charge of the centralized negotiation mechanism or to any other entity or subject of the securities market, the audited individual or consolidated financial information, the individual or consolidated interim financial statements, management report, special audit report, important events, and annual reports”;
As for the arguments exposed by HMC SAFI regarding the sanctioning criteria, it must be pointed out that the evaluation of the same will be considered in the following section;

IV. EVALUATION OF THE SANCTION

In accordance with what is established in Article 35 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, the commission of a minor nature infraction is subject to a sanction corresponding to a warning or a fine not less than one (1) and up to twenty-five (25) Tax Units (UIT);
Regarding this, taking into account that in the present sanctioning procedure infractions typified as minor referring to the non-compliance with the deadline for presenting occasional information are evaluated, it must be considered that item 1 of the “Criteria Applicable to the Administrative Sanctioning Procedure for Non-Compliance with the Regulations that regulate the Submission of Periodic or Occasional Information”, approved by SMV Resolution No. 006-2012-SMV/01 and its amendment (hereinafter, SANCTIONING CRITERIA) provides that the purpose of said criteria is “to establish sanctioning parameters that within the framework of the General Administrative Procedure Law, the Securities Market Law and the Decree Law on Collective Fund Management Companies allow imposing sanctions on issuers with values registered in the Public Registry of the Securities Market, legal entities registered in the Registries under the charge of the SMV, and other persons obliged to present periodic or occasional information for the non-compliances in the timely submission of said information that are typified as a minor infraction in the annexes of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by CONASEV Resolution No. 055-2001-EF94.10. The criteria that are developed below apply exclusively for the non-compliances of the regulations that regulate the submission of periodic or occasional information and are not applied extensively to other cases investigated by this Superintendency”;
Therefore, to evaluate the sanction that must be imposed on HMC SAFI for failing to comply with the deadline for communicating the important events relative to the election of the members of the Surveillance Committee, it corresponds to apply the SANCTIONING CRITERIA;
It is worth highlighting that the application of the SANCTIONING CRITERIA observes the principle of proportionality established in the TUO LPAG, since it allows determining in a predictable manner for the administered, the sanctions to be imposed on issuers of securities and on persons registered in the RPMV for non-compliances in the deadlines for the submission of information to which they are obliged by the regulations and for omission in the submission of that information that is required by the SMV;
For the purposes of determining the sanction that corresponds to the infractions subject to analysis, and in accordance with what is established in item 3.2 of the SANCTIONING CRITERIA, the evaluation criteria disposed of in Article 344 of the Single Text of the Securities Market Law, in Article 248, numeral 3, of the TUO LPAG, in Article 25 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, as well as in item 4.1 of the SANCTIONING CRITERIA, whose observance is mandatory, must be taken into account;

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría

In this sense, the evaluation of the sanction must consider the following: a) The severity of the damage to the public interest and/or the protected legal interest; b) The economic harm caused and its repercussion in the market; c) Sanctioning antecedents; d) Recidivism; e) The circumstances of the commission of the infraction; f) The illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infraction; g) The existence or non-existence of intent in the offender's conduct; and, h) The probability of detection of the infraction;
Regarding the severity of the damage to the public interest and/or the protected legal interest, it must be taken into consideration that when it comes to the submission of eventual information, any non-compliance with the regulations regarding its timely presentation, that is, the failure to observe the deadlines established for presenting such information, affects the transparency of the securities market, insofar as this safeguards the right of investors (actual and potential) and the general public to access such information in a timely manner in order to adopt investment decisions or carry out a specific evaluation; likewise, it affects the SMV in the implementation of its supervision and control activities that seek to protect the integrity of the market;
Therefore, it can be affirmed that HMC SAFI has affected the protected legal interest, which is market transparency, since it submitted the communication of the significant events subject to charges late;
With regard to the economic harm caused and the repercussion in the market, it has not been evidenced that the infractions incurred by HMC SAFI have produced a concrete, quantifiable harm in the market, that is, it has not been determined that there has been concrete harm or caused economic damage to one or more investors, so it has not been evidenced that there was any repercussion in the market;
Likewise, it must be noted that according to the SANCTION CRITERIA and Article 25°, literal a) of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, antecedents consist of final sanctions imposed by the SMV within the period of four (4) years prior to the commission of the infractions to be sanctioned; In this sense, from the review carried out in said period, it has been verified that HMC SAFI does not have sanctioning antecedents in the four (4) years prior to the commission of the infractions subject to analysis;
With reference to the recidivism of the infraction, that final sanction imposed by the SMV for the commission of the same infraction within the period of one (1) year from when the resolution sanctioning the first infraction became final is taken into account. In this sense, it must be stated that HMC SAFI does not record sanctions, within the aforementioned period, for the commission of the same infraction subject to analysis in the present administrative sanctioning procedure, therefore, the circumstances that constitute recidivism are not present;
As for the circumstances of the commission of the infractions, it must be mentioned that HMC SAFI, in its capacity as a company supervised by the SMV, knows the regulations that regulate the securities market and, in this sense, the regulations that oblige it to present eventual information to the SMV within the deadlines established therein. However, HMC SAFI submitted the communications corresponding to the significant events under evaluation in the present sanctioning procedure late; submitting the information for each case, with a (01) day delay with respect to the deadline;

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

With regard to the illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infractions, it must be noted that it has not been proven that HMC SAFI obtained a benefit directly related to the infractions subject to analysis;
Regarding the existence or non-existence of intent in the offender's conduct, it has not been evidenced that HMC SAFI acted with intent in the commission of the infractions subject to analysis;
With regard to the probability of detection of the infractions, it must be indicated that in the present case, the infractions incurred by HMC SAFI were evidenced as a result of the supervision and control activities carried out by the SMV regarding the timely submission of periodic and eventual information, according to what is established in the applicable regulations; therefore, the probability of detection was high;
Continuing with the analysis, it corresponds to determine the sanction to be imposed on HMC SAFI. In this sense, the SANCTION CRITERIA establish that a reprimand sanction may be imposed when the following guidelines established in subsection 4.2, numeral (ii) of the aforementioned criteria are met concurrently: (i) the impact on market transparency is minimal; (ii) the infraction committed has not caused concrete harm to investors or associates; (iii) the offending entity does not have antecedents or, if it does, they are infractions classified as minor offenses imposed in the four (4) years prior to the commission of the infraction being evaluated; (iv) the offending entity has not obtained a benefit from its illegal conduct; and, (v) it has not been proven that the offender acted with intent in the commission of the infraction;
Likewise, said SANCTION CRITERIA establish that if it is not appropriate to apply a reprimand sanction, a fine sanction must be imposed;
On this matter, with regard to the infractions subject to analysis, it has been verified that HMC SAFI does not have sanctioning antecedents in the four (4) years prior to the commission of the infractions being evaluated;
Likewise, it has not been proven that the infractions committed caused concrete harm to investors, it has not been evidenced that the investment fund management company obtained a benefit from its illegal conduct, nor that it has been proven that it acted with intent in the commission of the infractions;
As for the condition referring to the impact on market transparency being minimal, it must be warned in principle and as mentioned in the evaluation of the sanction criteria, that any non-compliance with the regulations regarding the deadlines established for presenting periodic or eventual information affects the transparency of the securities market, even more so if this non-compliance persists over time; since such information is relevant not only to the investors and shareholders of the management company, but to the market in general. In this sense, it is the obligation of every management company to present the eventual information required by the regulations within the established deadlines, that is, in a timely manner;

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

Nevertheless, it must be indicated that, the significant events subject to charges, although they present a delay of one (1) day in their presentation, it can be appreciated that during the period in which HMC SAFI did not report said significant events to the SMV, the degree of impact on market transparency has been minimal. Without prejudice to the fact that in similar cases, a greater delay in the presentation of information could determine a greater degree of impact on the transparency of the securities market;
In this sense, as a result of the evaluation carried out for the imputed infractions, it is observed that HMC SAFI meets the conditions established in subsection 4.2, numeral (ii) of the SANCTION CRITERIA, therefore, according to said criteria, it would correspond to apply a reprimand sanction for each of the two (2) infractions committed;
Likewise, it is worth noting that in the present procedure, the existence of aggravating circumstances contemplated in subsection 4.2, numeral (vi) of the aforementioned SANCTION CRITERIA has not been determined;
In addition to the above, it corresponds to analyze the exonerating and mitigating circumstances of responsibility established in Article 257° of the TUO LPAG 3, as well as the mitigating and exonerating conditions of responsibility established in Articles 26° and 27° of the SANCTIONS REGULATION;
Regarding this, it is not observed that in the present case any of the circumstances that constitute conditions exonerating responsibility have been configured;
With regard to the voluntary declaration of the commission of the infractions and the contribution of the offender to their clarification, established in Article 257°, numeral 2, literal a) of the TUO LPAG and in Article 26°, literals a) and b) of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, it must be noted that HMC SAFI has recognized its responsibility for the infractions subject to charges, expressly and in writing, within the period granted for the presentation of defenses, and in a precise, concise, clear, express and unconditional manner, without ambiguous or contradictory expressions, as well as has contributed to the clarification of the same;
In accordance with what is provided by Article 32°, numeral 17, of the Regulation on Organization and Functions of the SMV, approved by Supreme Decree Nº 216-2011-EF and its amendments, as well as the SANCTION CRITERIA and its amendment;

3
“Article 257.- Exonerating and mitigating circumstances of responsibility for infractions 1.- The following constitute conditions exonerating responsibility for infractions:
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 infraction. d) Mandatory order from 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 potential sanctioned party of the act or omission imputed as constituting an administrative infraction, prior to the notification of the charges referred to in subsection 3) of article 235. 2.- The following constitute mitigating conditions of responsibility for infractions:
a) If, after an administrative sanctioning procedure has begun, the offender recognizes 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 established by special regulation.”

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

RESOLVES:
Article 1º.- Declare that HMC Asset Management S.A. Sociedad Administradora de Fondos de Inversión has incurred one (01) infraction of a minor nature typified in Annex I, numeral 3, subsection 3.1 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution N° 035-2018-SMV/01, for not having timely communicated the significant event referred to the election of members of the Surveillance Committee of the HMC Crédito Perú II (PEN), FI Fund.

Article 2º.- Declare that HMC Asset Management S.A. Sociedad Administradora de Fondos de Inversión has incurred one (01) infraction of a minor nature typified in Annex I, numeral 3, subsection 3.1 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution N° 035-2018-SMV/01, for not having timely communicated the significant event referred to the election of members of the Surveillance Committee of the HMC Crédito Perú II (USD), FI Fund.

Article 3º.- Sanction HMC Asset Management S.A. Sociedad Administradora de Fondos de Inversión with two (2) reprimands, pursuant to Articles 1° and 2° of this resolution.

Article 4º.- This resolution does not exhaust the administrative route, unless it is consented to, and may be challenged before the Adjunct Superintendency of Prudential Supervision by filing a reconsideration appeal, presented before the same, within the period of fifteen (15) business days counted from the day following its notification.

Article 5º.- In the event that this resolution is not challenged by means of a reconsideration appeal within the period of fifteen (15) business days of being notified and remains consented to, it must be published on the Institutional Website of the SMV in the Unique Digital Platform of the Peruvian State, in observance of what is provided by numeral 1, 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 its amendment, and by what is provided in Article 14° of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution N° 035-2018-SMV/01.

Article 6º.- Transcribe this resolution to HMC Asset Management S.A. Sociedad Administradora de Fondos de Inversión.
Register, communicate and publish.

Omar Gutiérrez Ochoa
Adjunct Superintendent
Adjunct Superintendency of Prudential Supervision

Lineage