7. Legal Disputes

7.1 Legal Dispute of Advanced Info Service Public Company Limited

(1) TOT Public Company Limited submitted a dispute to the Alternative
Dispute Resolution Office, the Arbitration Institute, no. Black 9/2551
on 22 January 2008, demanding AIS to pay additional payment of revenue
sharing amounting to Baht 31,462.51 million plus interest at the rate of
1.25% per month computing from the due date on 10 January 2007 until the
date of full payment, which the additional revenue sharing is the same
amount as the excise tax that the Company had submitted to the Excise
Department according to the resolution of the Cabinet dated 11 February
2003. The said dispute is pending AIS’s preparation of the opposition
according to arbitration procedures.

However, AIS’s management believes that the Arbitration Panel should be
in the Company’s favor because TOT Public Company Limited had sent a
letter confirming that AIS has fully complied with the Cabinet’s
resolution and AIS has no further obligations of revenue sharing
percentage provided in the Cellular Mobile Phone Service and this
practice is same as other operators in the telecommunication industries,
thus the said dispute should have no impact to AIS’s financial position.
Nevertheless, CAT Telecom Public Company Limited has also submitted a
dispute, demanding the Mobile Phone Operators who are the parties, to
pay additional payment of revenue sharing which is similar to TOT Public
Company Limited.

(2) CAT Telecom Public Company Limited submitted a court case no. Black
1245/2551 on 7 March 2008 to the Civil Court against AIS as the
defendant no. 1 and AIN, our subsidiary, as the defendant no .2
requesting AIS and AIN to jointly pay the damage to CAT equaling to Baht
129,784,456.20 incurred from the traffic setting change by AIS and AIN
through the symbol “+” pressing of the subscriber routing to number 005
instead of 001, which belongs to CAT. This period is during the trial
period of AIN, approximately, the beginning of March 2007. It is accused
that its make misunderstanding to subscriber who has pressed the symbol
“+” and desired to route to number 001.

Though, the company has to oppose this case pursuant to court procedure.
The symbol “+” is the international symbol which no one can possess. It
is not the telecommunication symbol which CAT can be the ownership or
has the exclusive rights to use according to any laws. Thus, any mobile
phone operators have the rights to set the symbol “+”instead of the
number to any international call. Therefore, the company has not made
the wrongful acts and makes damage to CAT. This case is pending on the
preparation of plea by AIS and AIN according to laws.

7.2 Legal Dispute of Digital Phone Company Limited (“DPC”), a subsidiary
of AIS.

(1) DPC has three arbitration proceedings against it, the cases of
which, Ref. no. 36/2546 dated 30 June 2003, 62/2546 dated 28 October
2003 and 55/2549 dated 5 July 2006 were filed by Total Access
Communication Public Company Limited (TAC) to the Alternative Dispute
Resolution Office, the Arbitration Institute, demanding DPC to pay 1)
THB 699.77 million plus interest at the rate of 9.5% per annum on
principal amount of THB 653.34 million until the date the full payment
is made, 2) THB 720.63 million plus interest at the rate of 9.5% per
annum on principal amount of THB 715.41 million until the date the full
payment is made and 3) THB 3,766.91 million plus interest at the rate of
9.5% per annum on principal amount of THB 3,370.11 million until the
date the full payment is made respectively under the Agreement to Unwind
the Service Provider Agreement dated 7 January 1997 which DPC has
already submitted three separate responses to the said cases and are now
pending on consideration of the Arbitrators.

DPC has recorded these principal and interest (excluding interest on
overdue amounts) in the total concession rights payable (using the
effective interest rate method) of Baht 4,739 million. However, DPC’s
management believes that settlement of this arbitration case should not
have a material unfavorable effect on the financial statements.

(2) CAT Telecom Public Company Limited submitted a dispute to the
Alternative Dispute Resolution Office, the Arbitration Institute,
demanding DPC to pay numbering fee of THB 17.98 million plus penalty at
the rate of 1.25 % per month as from the submission date of the case
until the date the full payment is made and also the numbering fees
which CAT have to pay to NTC.

DPC has already paid this numbering fee excluding outstanding penalty.
The total amount of penalty, Baht 3.50 million, has ended on 29 February
2008, shall be compromised later.

(3) Besides, CAT Telecom Public Company Limited submitted a dispute to
the Arbitration Institute, ref. no. Black 3/2551 on 9 January 2008,
demanding DPC to pay additional payment of revenue sharing for Baht
2,449.09 million plus penalty at the rate of 1.25% per month of the
unpaid amount of each year computing from the due date until the date of
full payment, which amount is Baht 1,500.06 million calculated up to
December 2007, the totaling is Baht 3,949.15 million. The additional
revenue sharing in the said dispute is the same amount as the excise tax
which DPC had submitted to the Excise Department according to the
resolution of the Cabinet dated 11 February 2003 during 28 January 2003
to 26 February 2007. At present, DPC has submitted the opposition
according to arbitration procedures.

However, the management believes that the Arbitration Panel should be in
the DPC’s favor because CAT has never objected or opposed the DPC’s
revenue sharing payment. Furthermore, DPC has complied with the Cabinet
resolution and this practice is same as other operators in the
telecommunication industries, thus the said dispute shall have no impact
to DPC financial position.