It says depositors are relieved from financial collapse because top executives have been buying shares in their own bank.

Now, it says depositors are saying top executives have faith in the bank’s financial soundness, thus being worried is of no use.

But the author concluded that you are overoptimistic because blah blah...

Now, I can very well say 2nd is Author's main conclusion. And first is the premise used by depositors to come to their own conclusion.

A. The first summarizes the evidence used in the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second states the counterevidence on which the argument relies. --> 2nd is not a counter evidence. It is the main conclusion. Hence, incorrect.

B. The first summarizes the evidence used in the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is an intermediate conclusion supported by the evidence. --> 2nd is the main conclusion of the author.

C. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is evidence that undermines the support for this intermediate conclusion. --> Same as A.

D. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is the main conclusion of the argument. --> Here, I got 2nd statement correct. I donot agree with 1st boldface here. But since I have rejected all other options, I am left with only D as the answer.

E. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second states a further conclusion supported by this intermediate conclusion. --> Actually, the conclusion made by author is opposite to what depositors concluded.

Answer: D