Electronic document di gitally signed within the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Si gnatures and Digital Certificates, its Regulations and amendments.
The integrity of the document and the authorship of the si gnature(s) can be verified at https://apps. firma peru.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml Superintendency Resolution Adjunct SMV No. 061-2024-SMV/11 Lima, 25 September 2024

Summary: To sanction CENTRAL AZUCARERA CHUCARAPI-PAMPA BLANCA S.A. with one (1) reprimand for having committed one (1) minor infraction, typified in subsection 3.1 item 3 of Annex I of the Sanctions Regulations

Administered: CENTRAL AZUCARERA CHUCARAPI-PAMPA BLANCA S.A.

Subject

: Single-Instance Administrative Sanctioning Procedure Administrative Main Type: Subsection 3.1 of item 3 of Annex I of the Sanctions Regulations MINOR INFRACTION File No.: 2024005008 The Adjunct Superintendent of Supervision of

Market Conducts
SEEN:
Administrative file No. 2024005008, containing the administrative sanctioning procedure initiated by the General Directorate of Conduct Compliance of the Superintendency of the Securities Market – SMV (hereinafter, the IGCC), against CENTRAL AZUCARERA CHUCARAPI-PAMPA BLANCA S.A. (hereinafter, the Issuer); as well as Report No. 712-2024-SMV/11.2 (hereinafter, the Report), issued by the IGCC;

CONSIDERING:

I. FUNCTION AND COMPETENCE OF THE SASCM

1. That the IGCC —the instructing body of the administrative sanctioning procedures (hereinafter, the PAS) to which this case refers— has brought to the attention of the Adjunct Superintendency of Supervision of Market Conducts of the SMV (hereinafter, SASCM) the PAS of administrative file No. 2024005008 in order for it to issue a decision as the sanctioning body of single administrative instance in said PAS.

In this way, the SASCM assumes competence in observance of the exercise of the supervision function and the sanctioning power of the Superintendency of the Securities Market - SMV established in the Consolidated Single Text of its Organic Law, Decree Law No. 26126 (hereinafter, the SMV Organic Law), and in the Single Ordered Text of the Securities Market Law, Legislative Decree No. 861, approved by Supreme Decree No. 020-2023-EF (hereinafter, TUO of the LMV); as well as by the provisions of the Sanctions Regulations, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01 (hereinafter, Sanctions Regulations) and in articles 42 and 43 of the Organization and Functions Regulations of the SMV, approved by Supreme Decree No. 216-2011-EF (hereinafter, ROF of the SMV), in the sense that it is a specific function of the SASCM to impose sanctions at single administrative instance for the commission of infractions whose compliance control, according to its competences, corresponds to said Adjunct Superintendency.

Likewise, the SASCM has the powers to issue corrective measures aimed at reversing the situation altered by the commission of the infraction; II. FACTS, CHARGES, DEFENSES AND CLAIMS 2.1 Fact

2. That it was evaluated whether the Issuer complied with submitting its financial information in a timely manner;

2.2 Charge

3. That, as a result of said evaluation, through Charge Memorandum No. 1243-2024-SMV/11.2 of 16 April 2024 (hereinafter, the Charge Memorandum), a charge was formulated against the Issuer for having incompletely presented the consolidated interim financial statements as of 30 September 2023 approved in a board meeting of 31 October 2023, which were completed by regularization on 18 November 2023. (File No. 2023045954);

4. That the commission of the infraction typified in subsection 3.1 of item 3 of Annex I of the Sanctions Regulations was imputed;

2.3 Defenses and claims

5. That, through a document submitted on 30 April 2024, the Issuer presented its defenses, the following:

“1.

Consolidated interim financial statements (…), only including the “Statement of Changes in Net Equity”, REGARDING WHICH I MUST POINT OUT THAT, said statement is inaccurate since said information is validated by the MVNET, at the time of loading and sending the information, so in case of any error or absence of any data, this is detected by the system itself, not allowing the sending of the information; therefore it is impossible that the incomplete information corresponding to the financial statements corresponding to the III quarter (…) was sent.

2. Notes to the Financial Statements, since it only included the cover page, REGARDING WHICH I MUST POINT OUT THAT, effectively due to an involuntary error a corrupted file was sent on 31 October 2023, so on 18 November and at the request of the GENERAL DIRECTORATE OF CONDUCT SUPERVISION, the information corresponding to the Notes of the financial statements was regularized. Electronic document di

gitally signed within the framework of Law No. 27269,

Law of Si gnatures and Digital Certificates, its Regulations and amendments.
The integrity of the document and the authorship of the si gnature(s) can be verified at https://apps. firma peru.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml
3. Structured XBRL file was sent incomplete, REGARDING WHICH I MUST POINT OUT THAT, said statement is inaccurate since said information is validated by the MVNET, at the time of loading and sending the information because, in case of any error or lack of any data, this is automatically detected, not allowing the sending of the information.”
may be verified at https://apps. fi rmaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml

3. Structured XBRL file was sent incomplete, WITH REGARD TO THIS I MUST POINT OUT THAT, said statement is inaccurate since said information is validated by the MVNET, at the time of loading and sending the information because, in the event of any error or missing data, it is automatically detected, not allowing the sending of the information.

6. That the Single Consolidated Text of the General Administrative Procedure Law, approved by Supreme Decree N° 004-2019-JUS (hereinafter, TUO of the LPAG), contains common rules for the actions of the State's administrative function and regulates all administrative procedures carried out in entities, including special procedures. Likewise, item 3) of Article 248 of the TUO of the LPAG sets out the criteria relating to the gradation of the sanction: (a) The illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infringement, (b) The probability of detection of the infringement, (c) The seriousness of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal asset, (d) The economic harm caused, (e) Recidivism, for the commission of the same infringement within a period of one (1) year from the date the resolution sanctioning the first infringement became final, (f) The circumstances of the commission of the infringement; and, (g) The existence or not of intent in the conduct of the infringer;

7. That the charge formulated, the defenses presented, and the criteria relating to the gradation of the sanction have been subject to evaluation in the Report, which has been made known to the SASCM;

8. That, in compliance with item 5 of Article 255 of the TUO of the LPAG, by means of Office N° 2987-2024-SMV/11 of 11 July 2024, the Report was sent to the Issuer so that it may submit its allegations within five (5) business days of notification, which to date have not been submitted;

III. ISSUES TO BE DETERMINED

9. That, in the present PAS, the following must be determined:

(i) Whether or not the Issuer committed the infringement indicated in the Charge and Report.

(ii) Whether or not a sanction should be imposed on the Issuer.

IV. ANALYSIS

4.1 Applicable Regulations

10. That Article 31 of the TUO of the LMV states: “The provisions of the preceding article do not exempt the issuer from the timely delivery to the SMV and, where applicable, to the relevant stock exchange or entity responsible for operating the centralized mechanism, of the information that either of them requires and, necessarily, the following:

a) Its financial statements and indicators, with the minimum information generally indicated by the SMV, with a periodicity no greater than one quarter;

11. That Article 3 of the Standards on the Preparation and Presentation of Financial Statements and Annual Report by Entities Supervised by the Superintendency of the Stock Market, approved by Resolution SMV N° 016-2015-SMV/01 (hereinafter, Standards on the Preparation and

Electronic document di gitally signed within the framework of Law N° 27269, Law of Si gnatures and Digital Certificates, its Regulations and amendments.
The integrity of the document and the authorship of the( s) si gnature( s) can be verified at https://apps. si gnaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml

Presentation of FS), in force at the time of the facts, establish that financial information must be submitted mandatorily through the Securities Market System (MVNet) or by documentary procedure of the SMV, in the cases expressly indicated in SMV Resolution N° 010-2013-SMV/01 which approves the MVNet and SMV Virtual1 System Regulations and that must be complied with jointly with the following conditions2: (i) Be submitted in full; (ii) Be sent within the established deadlines; (iii) Observe the technical specifications approved by the SMV; and, (iv) Have been approved by the respective corporate body, noting this in the document accompanying the information;

12. That, Article 13 of the Financial Information Regulations, approved by CONASEV Resolution Nº 103-99-EF/94.10 (hereinafter, Financial Information Regulations) indicates that consolidated financial statements are the basic financial statements that present the financial position, the results of operations, changes in net equity, and cash flows of a parent company and its subsidiaries, as if they were those of a single company. Additionally, the Technical Specifications for the submission of financial information, applicable to registered securities-issuing companies, in item 2.4 of numeral 2, specify the content of the consolidated financial statements as follows:

“2.4 Quarterly Consolidated Financial Statements Content:

General Information
Statement of Financial Position
Income Statement
Statement of Comprehensive Income
Statement of Cash Flows Direct Method
Statement of Cash Flows Indirect Method
Statement of Changes in Equity (…)”

13. That, on 10 December 2023, the Standards on the Preparation, Presentation and Disclosure of Financial Statements and Annual Report and Management Report applicable to entities supervised by the SMV, approved by Superintendency Resolution N° 013-2023-SMV/01 and in force from 11 December 2023 (hereinafter, New Standards on the Preparation, Presentation and Disclosure of FS) were published;

14. That, in this regard, it must be indicated that Article 31 of the Financial Information Regulations defines the notes to the financial statements

[1] From 24 March 2024, the MVNet and SMV Virtual System Regulations came into force following their approval by SMV Resolution Nº 004-2024-SMV/01 of 20 March 2024.

[2] It is important to highlight that the requirements for submitting information to the SMV are established in the same terms by Article 5 of the Standards on the Preparation, Presentation and Disclosure of Financial Statements and Annual Report and Management Report applicable to entities supervised by the SMV, approved by SMV Resolution Nº 013-2023-SMV/01 of 06 December 2023.

as clarifications or explanations of facts or situations, quantifiable or not, that form an integral part of each and every one of the financial statements, and must be read together with them for correct interpretation;

15. That, non-compliance with the timely submission of financial information is typified in subsection 3.1 of numeral 3 of Annex I of the Sanctions Regulations, which indicates that it constitutes a minor offense: “Submitting financial information, individual or consolidated audited, interim individual or consolidated financial statements, management report, special audit report, material events, and, annual reports, to the SMV, the Stock Exchange, the entity in charge of the centralized trading mechanism, or any other securities market entity or subject, outside the established deadline, or doing so incompletely, or without observing the technical specifications approved by the SMV or without communicating approval by the corresponding corporate body.” (Emphasis added);

16. That, according to Article 35 of the Sanctions Regulations, said offenses are punishable by a reprimand or a fine of not less than one (1) UIT and up to twenty-five (25) UIT;

4.2 Case Assessment

17. That, in File No. 2024005008 containing the documentation of this PAS, it is noted that through Memorandum N° 296-2024-SMV/11.1 of 19 January 2024 (File No. 2024002344), the IGSC —an organ of the Superintendency of the Securities Market – SMV which has within its functions and powers the supervision of compliance with the rules applicable to issuers with securities registered in the RPMV—, submitted to the IGCC the result of its evaluation, and specifically that related to this case;

18. That, it must be borne in mind that the procedures and legal forms with which the IGSC conducts its oversight and/or supervision activity and upon concluding it with a report of indications of an offense, determine that its pronouncement or opinion on a specific supervision matter —which may even contain a decision, such as, for example, the adoption of corrective measures—, be an opinion on the merits of the matter; it must be specified that said opinion and the report of indications of an offense of the IGSC is not binding on the IGCC, as established in the second paragraph of Article 9 of the Sanctions Regulations3 4;

[3] Article 245 of the TUO of the LPAG indicates as forms or modes in which the oversight activity could conclude the following: 1) Record of agreement with the activity carried out by the administered party; 2) Recommendation of improvements or corrections to the activity carried out by the administered party; 3) The warning of the existence of non-compliance not susceptible to warranting the determination of administrative responsibilities; 4) The recommendation to initiate a procedure in order to determine the administrative responsibilities that may correspond; 5) The adoption of corrective measures and 6) Other forms as established by special laws. 4 Article 9.- PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS AS A CONSEQUENCE OF ACTIONS OF

[4] SUPERVISION (…) When such bodies conclude that there are sufficient indications of possible administrative offences, they forward the corresponding reports to the General Compliance Inspectorates, which determine whether or not an administrative sanctioning procedure should be initiated. Where appropriate, the General Compliance Inspectorates may carry out additional inspections or investigations of the reported indications. In the case of possible offences within the scope of the Regulations on the

Electronic document digitally signed within the framework of Law No. 27269, Law on Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments.
The integrity of the document and the authorship of the digital signa ture(s) can be verified at https://apps. fi rmaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml

19. That, in this way, it is established that in the evaluation of the facts related to the present PAS, two (2) other bodies of the Superintendency of the Stock Market – SMV, functionally independent of each other and of this Office, have intervened and participated prior to the issuance of this resolution; first the IGSC, which on its occasion reported the indications of infringement by means of the aforementioned memorandum, and then the IGCC, which, as a result of its evaluation, formulated the Charge Sheet and the Report; and at this point of the PAS it falls to the Office of the SASCM to issue a pronouncement containing its decision regarding the aforementioned charge, it being necessary to indicate that due to its nature, it will be a single-instance administrative decision;

20. That, prior to the corresponding analysis, it must be pointed out that the formulation of the charge was based on the fact that the Issuer did not communicate the financial information detailed in the Charge Sheet, within the period established by the regulations;

21. That, compliance with the obligation relating to the timely submission of periodic and occasional information by issuers of securities registered in the RPMV is necessary for the transparency and proper functioning of the securities market, and in that sense the transparency of information is a protected legal good, it must be pointed out that non-compliance with said obligation harms or affects it;

22. That, in relation to the defences submitted by the Issuer, the following must be pointed out:

(i) In the defense brief, the Issuer argues the following: regarding the consolidated interim financial statements, it maintains that any possible error in the information is detected by the MVNet during the data upload and submission process, and consequently, it would be the same system that would not allow the upload of incomplete information, so there is no possibility that they submitted the file incomplete; regarding the Notes to the Financial Statements, it admits an involuntary error in sending a corrupted file on 31 October 2023, but assures that it remedied the situation at the request of the IGSC; and, regarding the XBRL structured file, it reiterates that any error in the information would be detected by the MVNet and would not allow the submission of the incomplete file.

(ii) As part of the investigation work, and as recorded in the Report, the IGCC reviewed the MVNet Log of the Issuer for 31 October 2023, the date on which the consolidated interim financial statements as of 30 September 2023 were approved and the information was submitted for the first time. From this review, it was observed that the Issuer logged into the MVNet on said date and uploaded the information corresponding to the approval of the aforementioned financial statements, as well as that the submission was recorded correctly, which suggests that the MVNet did not detect any error in the submission of this information.

(iii) In application of the principles of administrative procedure: presumption of

[…] Participatory Financial Financing Activity and its Management Companies, preliminary inquiries are carried out by the General Directorate of Investigation and Innovation, which, if there are sufficient indications of possible administrative infringements, will determine whether or not to initiate an administrative sanctioning procedure. (…).

Electronic document di gitally signed within the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Di gital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments.
The integrity of the document and the authorship of the( s) sig nature( s) can be verified at https://apps. fi rmaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml

truthfulness5 and procedural good faith6, as well as the provisions of Article 517 of the TUO of the LPAG, the statements made by the Issuer regarding the complete submission of the file containing the consolidated interim financial statements and the XBRL structured file are considered truthful.

(iv) However, it is important to point out that in the defense brief, the Issuer acknowledges having sent a corrupted file that contained only the cover page of the Notes to the Financial Statements, a situation that was subsequently corrected on 18 November 2023.

23. That, in this way, having proven the conduct constituting the aforementioned infringement and determined the administrative liability of the Issuer, it is appropriate to proceed with the calculation of the sanction in accordance with the principle of reasonableness;

V. DETERMINATION OF THE SANCTION

24. That, the non-compliance regarding the complete submission of financial information is typified in subsection 3.1 of item 3 of Annex I of the Sanctions Regulations, which states that it constitutes a minor infringement: “Submitting outside the established deadline, or doing 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, the Stock Exchange, the entity in charge of the centralized trading mechanism or any other entity or subject of the

[5] Article IV. Principles of administrative procedure The administrative procedure is fundamentally based on the following principles, without prejudice to the validity of other general principles of Administrative Law: (…) 1.7. Principle of presumption of truthfulness.- In the processing of the administrative procedure, it is presumed that the documents and declarations made by the administered parties in the manner prescribed by this Law correspond to the truth of the facts they affirm. This presumption admits rebuttal evidence. (…)

[6] Article IV. Principles of administrative procedure (…) 1.8. Principle of procedural good faith.- The administrative authority, the administered parties, their representatives or lawyers and, in general, all participants in the procedure, carry out their respective procedural acts guided by mutual respect, collaboration and good faith. The administrative authority cannot act against its own acts, except in the cases of ex officio review contemplated in this Law. No regulation of the administrative procedure may be interpreted in such a way as to protect any conduct contrary to procedural good faith. (…)

[7] Article 51.- Presumption of truthfulness 51.1 All sworn declarations, substitute documents submitted and the information included in the briefs and forms submitted by the administered parties for the performance of administrative procedures are presumed to be verified by the person making use of them, with respect to their own situation, as well as to be truthful content for administrative purposes, unless proven otherwise. In the case of documents issued by governmental authorities or third parties, the administered party may prove their due diligence in carrying out the corresponding and reasonable verifications prior to their submission. (…)

securities market, the audited individual or consolidated financial information, the individual or consolidated interim financial statements, management report, special audit report, material events and, annual reports.” (Underlining added);

25. That, in accordance with article 35 of the Sanctions Regulations, said infringement is punishable by a warning or a fine of not less than one (1) UIT and up to twenty-five (25) UIT.

SPECIAL SANCTION CRITERIA

26. That, for the purpose of analyzing the corresponding sanction for this type of non-compliance, the Criteria applicable to the administrative sanctioning procedure for non-compliance with the norms regulating the submission of periodic or occasional information, approved by Resolution SMV No. 006-2012-SMV/01, in force at the time of the commission of the infringement (Special Sanction Criteria), must be taken into account;

27. That, however, it must be indicated that by article 1 of Resolution SMV No. 007-2023-SMV/01 of 04 September 2023, the Regime of Graduality of Sanctions for the out-of-time submission of financial information, annual report and material facts (New Regime of Graduality of Sanctions) was approved, whose article 4 provided for its entry into force as of 01 January 2024 and whose article 2 repealed the Special Sanction Criteria;

28. That, in view of the above, it is necessary to analyze whether the provisions of the New Regime of Graduality of Sanctions should be applied in the present PAS by virtue of the Principle of Favorable Retroactivity, established in numeral 5 of article 230 of the TUO of the LPAG, which states: "(...) the sanctioning provisions in force at the time the administered party incurs in the conduct to be sanctioned are applicable, unless the subsequent ones are more favorable to them";

29. That, in that sense, for the purposes of the sanction, the aforementioned norms are consistent with the provisions of numeral 3) of article 2488 of the TUO of the LPAG and article 3449 of the TUO of the LMV, which develop the criteria for the gradation of the sanction: (i) the sanction history of the issuer, (ii) recidivism, (iii) the circumstances of the commission of the infringement, (iv) the economic damage caused and its impact on the market, (v) the illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infringement, (vi) the probability of detection of the

[8] TUO of the LPAG Article 248.- Principles of the administrative sanctioning power (...) 3. Reasonableness. - Authorities must foresee that the commission of the sanctionable conduct does not result in more advantages 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 qualified as an infringement, observing the following criteria which are indicated for the purposes of its gradation (...).

[9] TUO of the LMV Article 344.- Criteria to Consider. - The administrative sanctions imposed must take into account the history of the offender, the circumstances of the commission of the infringement, the damage caused and its impact on the market, being classified according to the aforementioned criteria as very serious, serious or minor.

Electronic document fi digitally signed in the framework of Law N° 27269, Ley de Fi gital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulation and amendments.
The integrity of the document and the authorship of the( s) si gnature( s) can be verified at https://apps. fi rmaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml

infraction, (vii) the seriousness of the harm to the public interest and/or protected legal interest and (viii) the existence or not of intent in the offender's conduct.

30. That, in relation to the seriousness of the harm to the public interest and/or protected legal interest, it must be indicated that the timely submission of financial information has the purpose of allowing investors to adopt investment decisions in an adequately informed manner. In this way, investors are protected and the asymmetry in access to information is reduced; therefore, the protected legal interest is the transparency of the securities market, which, when transgressed, affects the public interest. In that sense, the infraction incurred by the Issuer affects the transparency of the securities market;

31. That, with respect to the sanction history, article 25 of the Sanctions Regulation establishes that the offender's history consists of the sanctions imposed on it by the SMV that became final within the four (4) years prior to the moment of the commission of the infraction to be sanctioned. Likewise, the commission of the same infraction in the year prior to the infraction to be sanctioned is not considered history, since this commission would be qualified as recidivism. In application of said criterion, it has been verified that the Issuer has a sanction history, as detailed in the Report;

32. That, regarding the recidivism of the offender, literal b) of article 25 of the Sanctions Regulation establishes that the final sanction imposed by the SMV within a period of one (1) year prior to the commission of the infraction to be sanctioned is taken into account. In this regard, it has been verified that there is no recidivism on the part of the Issuer;

33. That, in relation to the circumstances of the commission of the infraction, it has been verified that the Issuer submitted incompletely the consolidated interim financial statements as of 30 September 2023 approved in the board meeting of 31 October 2023; because, on 31 October 2023, they sent an incomplete file of the Notes to the Financial Statements that only included the cover page, which was completed through regularization of 18 November 2023;

34. That, with respect to the economic harm and its impact on the market, it is considered that although by their nature, both criteria cannot be reliably measured; it can be recognized that the non-compliance committed by the Issuer has a negative impact on the market, since the analyzed financial information has not been disseminated in a timely manner. However, it must be mentioned that to date, there has been no claim or complaint from any shareholder and/or investor against the Issuer, so it can be stated that it has not been evidenced that the breaches have produced a quantifiable detriment, understood as an economic damage caused to one or several investors;

35. That, in relation to the illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infraction, it can be stated that there are not sufficient elements to indicate that the Issuer obtained an illegal benefit as a consequence of the commission of the infraction under evaluation in the present PAS;

36. That, regarding the probability of detection of the committed infraction, it must be noted that the probability is high, because this class of breaches are corroborated by the SMV itself through actions

Electronically signed document digitally signed within the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulation and amendments.
The integrity of the document and the authorship of the( s) sign ature( s) can be verified at https://apps. fi rmaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml

periodic control;

37. That, in relation to the existence or not of intentionality in the conduct of the offender, it is considered that the Issuer's action was not intentional; however, a lack of due diligence is evidenced, since it knows the deadlines for the timely communication of material facts in its capacity as an issuer with securities registered in the RPMV;

38. That, in addition to the foregoing, it should be noted that in the present PAS it has been verified that no exempting or mitigating circumstances of liability established in article 257 of the TUO of the LPAG10, in accordance with articles 2611 and 2712 of the Sanctions Regulation, have been presented;

Evaluation of the Principle of Favorable Retroactivity

39. That, in light of this situation and in application of the principle of benign retroactivity, indicated in numeral 5 of article 230 of the TUO

[10] "Article 257.- Exemptions and mitigating circumstances of liability for infractions 1.- The following constitute exempting conditions of liability for infractions: a) Fortuitous event or duly proven force majeure. 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 it affects the aptitude to understand the infraction. d) The mandatory order of a competent authority, issued in the exercise of its functions. e) The error induced by the Administration or by a confusing or illegal administrative provision. f) The voluntary correction by the possible sanctioned party of the act or omission imputed as constituting an administrative infraction, prior to the notification of the imputation of charges referred to in subsection 3) of article 235. 2.- The following constitute mitigating conditions of liability for infractions: a) If, once an administrative sanctioning procedure has been initiated, the offender expressly and in writing acknowledges their responsibility. In cases where the applicable sanction is a fine, it is reduced to an amount not less than half of its amount. b) Others established by special norm."

[11] "Article 26.- MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES OF LIABILITY FOR INFRACTIONS The following constitute mitigating conditions of liability for infractions: a) Acknowledgment of responsibility by the offender expressly and in writing, once the administrative sanctioning procedure has been initiated. When the applicable sanction is a fine, it is reduced, taking into account the following: (…) 3. If the acknowledgment is presented after the expiration of the term granted to formulate allegations to the instruction report and up to before the issuance of the sanction resolution, the amount

[12] of reduction will be ten percent (10%)". 12 "Article 27.- EXEMPTIONS FROM LIABILITY FOR INFRACTIONS The following constitute exempting conditions of liability for infractions: a) Fortuitous event, force majeure or another exceptional situation that, in the opinion of the SMV, is comparable to 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 it affects the aptitude to understand the infraction. d) The mandatory order of a competent authority, issued in the exercise of its functions. e) The error induced by the Administration or by a confusing or illegal administrative provision. f) The voluntary correction by the possible sanctioned party of the act or omission imputed as constituting an administrative infraction, prior to the notification of the imputation of charges referred to in subsection 3) of article 253 of the LPAG and provided that no communication demanding compliance with the obligation has been sent".

of the LPAG13, by which it is possible to apply sanctioning norms subsequent to the commission of the illicit act provided that they benefit the administered party, the corresponding sanction will be graduated, taking into account the Special Sanction Criteria and also the New Regime of Graduality of Sanctions;

On the application of the Warning sanction

40. That, taking into account the criteria detailed in this section, we proceed to evaluate the considerations for the application of the warning sanction taking into account subsections (i) and (ii)14 of numeral 4.2 of the Special Sanction Criteria and numeral 6.115 of article 6 of the New Regime of Graduality of Sanctions;

41. That, from the contrast of both norms, we can point out that for the specific case, since there is no presence of aggravating factors, the requirements established by the Special Sanction Criteria are lower than the requirements indicated by the New Regime of Graduality of Sanctions. However, it is noted that the additional requirement indicated in the New Regime of Graduality of Sanctions, that the offending subject is not a repeat offender, is also met by the Issuer in this case;

42. That, in accordance with the foregoing, the New Regime of Graduality of Sanctions is not more beneficial for the Issuer in the specific case, and therefore the norms in force at the date of the commission of the facts will be applied, that is, the Special Sanction Criteria;

43. That, in this sense, subsection ii) of numeral 4.2 of the

[13] Article 230.- Principles of the administrative sanctioning power The sanctioning power of all entities is additionally governed by the following special principles: (…) 5. Non-retroactivity.- The sanctioning provisions in force at the time the administered party incurs the conduct to be sanctioned are applicable, unless subsequent ones are more favorable to them.

[14] (…) 14 4.2. GUIDELINES FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE CRITERIA (i) The application of the following guidelines assumes the non-existence of the aggravating factors developed in point V of this section. (ii) The sanction of admonition may be applied when the following is concurrently met: (i) the affectation to market transparency is minimal; ii) the infraction committed has not caused a concrete detriment to investors or associates; (iii) the offending subject does not have a record or, having one, it involves infractions classified as minor offenses imposed in the four (4) years prior to the commission of the infraction being evaluated; (iv) the offending subject has not obtained a benefit from their illegal conduct; and (v) it has not been proven that the offender acted with intent in the commission of the infraction. 15 Article 6.- GUIDELINES FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE GRADUALITY REGIME

[15] 6.1 CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE SANCTION OF ADMONITION The sanction of admonition may be applied when the following assumptions are concurrently met: a. When the affectation to market transparency is minimal. This statement is linked to the criterion of the severity of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal right; b. The infraction committed has not caused a concrete detriment to investors or associates; c. The offending subject does not have a record or, having one, it involves sanctions corresponding to minor infractions imposed by the SMV that have become final in the four (4) years prior to the commission of the infraction being evaluated; d. The offending subject is not a repeat offender; e. The offender has not obtained benefits from their administrative infraction; and, f. It has not been proven that the offender acted with intentionality in the commission of the infraction.

Electronic document fi digitally signed under Law No. 27269, Law of Fi rmas and Digital Certificates, its Regulation and amendments.
The integrity of the document and the authorship of the( s) fi rma( s) can be verified at https://apps. fi rmaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml

Special Sanction Criteria states that the sanction of admonition may be applied when the following is concurrently met: (i) The affectation to market transparency is minimal; (ii) The infraction committed has not caused a concrete detriment to investors or associates; (iii) The offending subject does not have a record or, having one, it involves infractions classified as minor offenses imposed in the four (4) years prior to the commission of the infraction being evaluated; (iv) The offending subject has not obtained a benefit from their illegal conduct; and, (v) It has not been proven that the offender acted with intent in the commission of the infraction;

44. That, as detailed in the evaluation of the Special Sanction Criteria, this Deputy Superintendence can point out that: (i) In the present case, the affectation to market transparency was minimal; (ii) The infraction committed has not caused a concrete detriment to investors or associates, since no type of complaint or receipt of evidence has been recorded in this regard; (iii) Although the Issuer has a record of infractions, these records involve infractions classified as minor offenses; (iv) The offending subject has not obtained a benefit from their illegal conduct; and, (v) It has not been proven that the offender acted with intent in the commission of the infraction;

45. That, therefore, having concurrently met the provisions in subsection (ii) of numeral 4.2 of the Special Sanction Criteria, in force at the date of the commission of the infraction, and based on the evaluation carried out by this Deputy Superintendence, it is appropriate to impose on the Issuer as a sanction one (1) admonition for the breach in the late submission of the consolidated interim financial statements as of 30 September 2023; and

In accordance with the provisions of numerals 14 and 36 of article 43 of the Regulation of Organization and Functions of the Superintendence of the Securities Market – SMV, approved by Supreme Decree No. 216-2011-EF;

RESOLVES:

Article 1.- Declare that CENTRAL AZUCARERA CHUCARAPI-PAMPA BLANCA S.A. has incurred in one (1) infraction of a minor nature, classified in subsection 3.1 of numeral 3 of Annex I of the Sanction Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01, for having submitted late the consolidated interim financial statements as of 30 September 2023.

Article 2.- Sanction CENTRAL AZUCARERA CHUCARAPI-PAMPA BLANCA S.A. with one (1) admonition, as provided in article 1 of this Resolution.

Article 3.- This Resolution does not exhaust the administrative remedy, and it may be challenged before this Deputy Superintendency of Market Conduct Supervision by filing a reconsideration appeal, an administrative appeal recognized in Article 218 of the Single Ordered Text of the General Administrative Procedure Law – Law No. 27444, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS, within a period of fifteen (15) business days, counted from the day following its notification.

Article 4.- If this Resolution is not subject to challenge, it must be published on the "SMV Institutional Page

Electronic document di gitally signed under Law No. 27269, Law of Di gital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments.
The integrity of the document and the authorship of the( s) si gnature( s) can be verified at https://apps. fi rmaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml

on the Single Digital Platform of the Peruvian State for Citizen Guidance (www.gob.pe/smv)", in compliance with the provisions of numeral 1 of Article 7 of the "Policy on the dissemination of draft regulations, general legal norms, early agenda and other administrative acts of the SMV", approved by SMV Resolution No. 014-2014-SMV/01, and by the provisions of the last paragraph of Article 14 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01.

Article 5.- Transcribe this Resolution to CENTRAL AZUCARERA CHUCARAPI-PAMPA BLANCA S.A.

Signed by: MENESES CAMARGO Carlos Enrique Razon:

Signed by: RIVERO ZEVALLOS Carlos Razon:

Carlos Rivero Zevallos
Deputy Superintendent
Deputy Superintendency of Market Conduct Supervision

Superintendency Resolution Adjunct SMV No. 061-2024-SMV/11