5/28/2020
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
worded, except for the name of the person and the amount defrauded, as follows:
That on or about the period covering April 2004 to October 2004, in the City
of Mandaluyong, Philippines, a place within the jurisdiction of the Honorable
Court, the above-named accused, with intent to defraud RUZZEL S.
CRISOSTOMO, by means of deceit and false pretenses executed prior to or
simultaneous with the commission of fraud, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously pretend and falsely represent to complainant that
she has the capacity to recruit, enlist and facilitate his deployment abroad
for the amount of P83,500.00, complainant relying on said representation
was induced to give and deliver to the accused, as in fact he gave and
delivered the said amount to her and which amount accused appropriated
for her personal use and despite repeated demands, accused failed and
continue to fail to return to complainant said amount, to the damage and
prejudice of the complainant.
CONTRARY TO LAW.[4]
The same acts were committed against Renante B. Quirao, Jr. for P49,500.00;[5]
Rosalyn A, Fernandez for P64,000.00;[6] Lester C. Duyao for P57,500.00;[7] Ma.
Reinaluz De Guzman for P83,500.00;[8] Reynaldo B. Adremesin for P75,000.00;[9]
Arvin M. Ariguin for P97,500.00;[10] and Otelio J. Florentino, Jr. for P75,000.00.[11] The
cases were docketed as Criminal Case Nos. MC05-9048-9055. [12] The estafa and
illegal recruitment cases were raffled to the RTC, Branch 211, Mandaluyong City.
Upon arraignment, appellant pleaded “not guilty” to all the charges. Trial on the merits
ensued.
The prosecution established that on different occasions, appellant represented herself
to be capable of deploying workers for a fee to South Korea. Believing on such
representation, the victims parted with their money and waited for appellant’s
instructions. Upon receipt of the initial payments made by the victims, appellant issued
either receipts or petty cash vouchers. Afterwhich, appellant stopped seeing them and
failed to deploy them. Appellant yet demanded additional placement fee and made
instructions to meet them at Greenwich Restaurant in Shaw Blvd. in Mandaluyong City.
Prior to said meeting, the victims went to the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to
complain about appellant’s activities. They likewise informed the NBI of their scheduled
meeting with appellant, hence, the plan for entrapment operation where appellant was
arrested. Upon her arrest, the NBI agents took from her the marked money. She was,
likewise, found positive for yellow fluorescent smudges.[13]
Appellant, for her part, raised the defense of denial and claimed that she herself was an
applicant and a victim of Llanesa Consultancy. She denied having transacted with the
victims and explained that she was shocked when NBI agents invited her while she was
attending mass in Mandaluyong City. As to the receipts and petty cash vouchers, she
elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/57038
2/11