was only 11 years old at the time, by kissing her using threats and intimidation. Eulalio can only be held guilty of acts of lasciviousness although charged with rape "following the variance doctrine enunciated under Section 4[27] in relation to Section 5[28] of Rule 120 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure. Acts of lasciviousness; the offense proved, is included in rape, the offense charged."[29] Apart from this, We must also consider that the said felony should be evaluated in light of RA 7610 and as charged in the Information. The case of People v. Molejon[30] is instructive in this respect: On the one hand, conviction under Article 336 of the RPC requires that the prosecution establish the following elements: (a) the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness upon another person of either sex; and (b) the act of lasciviousness or lewdness is committed either (i) by using force or intimidation; or (ii) when the offended party is deprived of reason or is otherwise unconscious; or (iii) when the offended party is under 12 years of age. On the other hand, sexual abuse under Section 5(b), Article III of R.A. No. 7610 has three elements: (1) the accused commits an act of sexua1 intercourse or lascivious conduct; (2) the said act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse; and (3) the child is below 18 years old. To further expound on the aspect of other sexual abuse, the case of Quimvel v. People[31] as cited in the Molejon case, explained that: As regards the second additional element, it is settled that the child is deemed subjected to other sexual abuse when the child engages in lascivious conduct under the coercion or influence of any adult. Intimidation need not necessarily be irresistible. It is sufficient that some compulsion equivalent to intimidation annuls or subdues the free exercise of the will of the offended party. The law does not require physical violence on the person of the victim; moral coercion or ascendancy is sufficient. The petitioner's proposition — that there is not even an iota of proof of force or intimidation as AAA was asleep when the offense was committed and, hence, he cannot be prosecuted under RA 7610 — is bereft of merit. When the victim of the crime is a child under twelve (12) years old, mere moral ascendancy will suffice. (Emphasis ours, citations omitted.) Withal, there is basis to rule that there was sexual abuse in the instant case, given that Eulalio kissed AAA, who was only 11 years old at the time, by employing threats to force her into submission.