G. R. No. 178337 6 of 21 http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/june2009/178337.htm WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Court finds accused CARMEN RITUALO y RAMOS, GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes of: 1. Simple Illegal Recruitment (Criminal Case Number 01-0076) under Section 7 of Republic Act No. 8042 otherwise known as the Migrant Workers Act of 1995, and sentences her to suffer an Indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of Six (6) years and ONE (1) day, as minimum, to EIGHT (8) years, as maximum, and to pay a fine of P200,000.00. 2. In Criminal Case Number 01-0077 for Estafa, herein accused is hereby sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty of prison term of six (6) months and One (1) day of Prission (sic) Correctional (sic), as minimum, to seven (7) years, eleven (11) months and eleven (11) days of Prision Mayor, as maximum and is ORDERED to indemnify Felix Biacora actual damages in the amount of P66,000.00 which is minus the amount of P14,000.00 which the private complainant admitted to have been refunded to him. [27] Cost de oficio. Ritualos Motion for Reconsideration of the trial courts decision was subsequently [28] dated 21 January 2005. denied in an Order [29] In an Order dated 1 March 2005, the RTC granted and approved the Notice of [30] filed by Ritualo. Appeal The Court of Appeals, in its Decision promulgated on 23 April 2007, affirmed the judgment of the RTC insofar as the conviction of Ritualo was concerned. As reasoned by the Court of Appeals, [a]s against the positive and categorical testimony of the [Biacora], [31] [Ritualos] denials cannot prevail. Particularly, the appellate court held that Ritualos acts of promising and assuring employment overseas to [Biacora] [fell] squarely within the ambit of recruitment and placement as defined by [The Migrant Workers Act or Republic [32] Act No. 8042]. With respect to the charge of Estafa under the Revised Penal Code, the appellate court likewise found that all the elements of said crime existed in the case at bar, i.e., [Ritualo] misrepresented herself to the [Biacora] as the person who could send him to Australia for employment, and by reason of misrepresentations, false assurances and deceit, [Biacora] was induced to part with his money in payment of placement fees, thereby causing him damage and prejudice. [33] 1/28/2016 11:03 AM