5/3/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly presumption that evidence suppressed would be adverse if produced."[11] Large scale illegal recruitment is punishable by life imprisonment and a fine of P100,000.00 under Article 39 (a) of the Labor Code,[12] hence, the trial court imposed the proper penalty. As regards the conviction of accused-appellants for estafa on five (5) counts in Criminal Cases Nos. Q-93-48584, Q-93-4858, Q-93-48587, Q-93-48588 and Q-93-48589, we have ruled in a number of cases that a person convicted of illegal recruitment under the Labor Code can be convicted of violation of the Revised Penal Code provisions on estafa, provided the elements of the crime are present. The elements of estafa are: (a) that the accused defrauded another by abuse of confidence or by means of deceit, and (b) that damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended party or third person. In relation thereto, Art. 315 of the Revised penal Code provides for the penalty thus- "1st. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period, if the amount of the fraud is over P12,000 but does not exceed P22,000, and if such amount exceeds the latter sum, the penalty provided in this paragraph shall be imposed in its maximum period, adding one year for each additional P10,000; but the total penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed twenty years. In such a case, and in connection with the accessory penalties which may be imposed and for the purpose of the other provision of this Code, the penalty shall be termed prision mayor or reclusion temporal, as the case may be. We are convinced that accused-appellants defrauded complainants/witnesses Violeta de la Cruz (Criminal Case No. Q-93-48588); Remelyn Jacinto (Criminal Case No. Q-9348589); and Teresita Lorenzo (Criminal Case No. Q-93-48587) through deceit. A scrutiny of their testimonies in court reveal that they were misled into believing that accused-appellants could provide them employment in Taiwan. As a result, the three complainants/witnesses each parted with P16, 000.00 in search of greener pastures to improve their lot. The RPC imposes the penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum, period "if the amount of the fraud is over 12, 000 pesos but does not exceed 22,000 pesos." The amount involved in each of the said three cases for estafa is within the above range. Under the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the maximum term of the penalty shall be "that which, in view of the attending circumstances, could be properly imposed" under the Revised Penal Code, and the minimum shall be "within the range of the penalty next lower to prescribed" for the offense.[13] In the absence of mitigating and aggravating circumstances, the trial court correctly imposed an indeterminate prison term of "one (1) year, eight (8) months and twenty-one (21) days of prision correccional as minimum to five (5) years, five (5) months and eleven (11) days of prision correccional as maximum for each of the three counts of estafa."[14] https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/52758 10/12