4/9/2020
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
save for the date and the names of private complainants, uniformly read:
That on or about August 10, 2002, in the City of Manila, Philippines, the said
accused did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously defraud
ALBERTO A. AGLANAO in the following manner, to wit: the said accused, by
means of false manifestations and fraudulent representation which she
made to said ALBERTO A. AGLANAO prior to and even simultaneous with the
commission of the fraud, to the effect that she [has] the power and capacity
to recruit and employ the latter in Taiwan as a factory worker and could
facilitate the processing of the pertinent papers if given the necessary
amount to meet the requirements thereof, induced and succeeded in
inducing the said ALBERTO A. AGLANAO to give and deliver, as in fact he
gave and delivered to the said accused the amount of P80,000.00 on the
strength of the said manifestations and representations, said accused well
knowing that the same were false and fraudulent and were made solely to
obtain, as in fact she did obtain the amount of P80,000.00 which amount,
once in her possession, with intent to defraud, they willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously misappropriated, misapplied and converted the same to her own
personal use and benefit, to the damage and prejudice of said ALBERTO A.
AGLANAO in the aforesaid amount of P80,000.00, Philippine Currency.
Contrary to law.[5]
On arraignment, appellant pleaded not guilty to all charges. A joint trial of the cases
ensued.
At the trial, private complainant Rey P. Tajadao testified that in August 2002, his fellow
complainant, Alberto A. Aglanao, introduced him to appellant Chua. By then, Aglanao
had already submitted his application for employment abroad with appellant. Since
Tajadao was also interested to work overseas, he suggested that Tajadao apply as well.
Soon after, Tajadao met with appellant, who offered him a job as a factory worker in
Taiwan for deployment within the month. Appellant then required him to undergo
medical examination and pay a placement fee of P80,000. Chua assured Tajadao that
whoever pays the application fee the earliest can leave sooner. Thus, Tajadao delivered
to appellant staggered payments of P40,000, P35,000 and P5,000 at the Golden Gate
International (Golden Gate) Office in Paragon Tower, Ermita, Manila. Said payments
are evidenced by a voucher[6] signed by appellant.
After completing payment, Tajadao was made to sign a contract containing stipulations
as to salary and conditions of work. On several occasions, thereafter, he returned to
appellant’s office to follow-up on his application. After several visits, however, Tajadao
noticed that all the properties of Golden Gate in its Paragon Tower Office were already
gone.
Tajadao filed a complaint for illegal recruitment against appellant before the Philippine
Overseas Employment Agency (POEA). It was only then that he learned that appellant
elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/55182
2/14