inconsequential that the sexual abuse occurred only once because, as expressly provided in Section 3 (b) of R.A. 7610, the abuse may be habitual or not. It also observed that Article III of R.A. 7610 is captioned as "Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse" because Congress really intended to cover a situation where the minor may have been coerced or intimidated into lascivious conduct, not necessarily for money or profit, hence, the law covers not only child prostitution but also other forms of sexual abuse. In support of its ruling in Olivarez, the Court cited People v. Larin[14] which was restated in Amployo v. People,[15] thus: A child is deemed exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse, when the child indulges in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct (a) for money, profit, or any other consideration; or (b) under the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or group. x x x. It must be noted that the law covers not only a situation in which a child is abused for profit, but also one in which a child, through coercion or intimidation, engages in lascivious conduct.[16] Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio dissented in Olivarez where he pointed out that the second element of acts of lasciviousness, Section 5, Article III of R.A. 7610 requires that the accused performs on the child a lascivious conduct separate and different from the child's exploitation in prostitution or subject to other sexual abuse. However, in Garingarao v. People,[17] the Court, in a Decision[18] penned by Justice Carpio, affirmed the conviction of petitioner for acts of lasciviousness in relation to R.A. 7610 in an Information which reads: That on or about the 29th day of October 2003, at Virgen Milagrosa University Hospital, San Carlos City, Pangasinan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with lewd designs, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously touched the breast of AAA, 16 years of age, touched her genitalia, and inserted his finger into her vagina, to the damage and prejudice of said AAA who suffered psychological and emotional disturbance, anxiety, sleeplessness and humiliation. Contrary to Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code in relation to RA 7610. Citing Olivarez, the Court held in Garingarao that petitioner is liable for acts of lasciviousness in relation to R.A. 7610 even if the crime occurred only once: The Court has ruled that a child is deemed subject to other sexual abuse when the child is the victim of lascivious conduct under the coercion or influence of any adult. In lascivious conduct under the coercion or influence of any adult, there must be some form of compulsion equivalent to intimidation which subdues the free exercise of the offended party's free will. In this case, Garingarao coerced AAA into submitting to his lascivious acts by pretending that he was examining her.