…. There are three ways of committing estafa under Article 315 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code: (1) by using a fictitious name; (2) by falsely pretending to possess power, influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions; and (3) by means of other similar deceits. Under this class of estafa, the element of deceit is indispensable.77 In this case, private complainant Raul Durano was led by appellant to believe that he possessed the power and qualifications to provide Durano with work abroad, when in fact he was not licensed or authorized to do so. Deceived, private complainant parted with his money and delivered the same to appellant. Plainly, appellant is guilty of estafa. The penalty prescribed by Article 315 is composed of only two, not three, periods, in which case, Article 65 of the same Code requires the division of the time included in the penalty into three equal portions of time included in the penalty prescribed, forming one period of each of the three portions. Applying the latter provision, the maximum, medium and minimum periods of the penalty prescribed are: Maximum - 6 years, 8 months, 21 days to 8 years Medium - 5 years, 5 months, 11 days to 6 years, 8 months, 20 days Minimum - 4 years, 2 months, 1 day to 5 years, 5 months, 10 days Appellant was proved to have defrauded private complainant Durano in the amount of P18, 000.00. Thus, the penalty prescribed shall be imposed in its medium period, or 5 years, 5 months and 11 days of prision correccional to 6 years, 8 months and 20 days of prision mayor, as the amount defrauded does not exceedP22,000.0078 and as no aggravating or mitigating circumstance is present.79 In imposing a prison sentence for an offense punished by the Revised Penal Code, the Court is required to impose upon the accused an indeterminate sentence. The maximum term thereof shall be that which, in view of the attending circumstances, could be properly imposed under the rules of the said Code. Here, the maximum term is 5 years, 5 months and 11 days of prision correccional to 6 years, 8 months and 20 days of prision mayor. On the other hand, the minimum term shall be "within the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the Code for the offense." The penalty next lower to that prescribed by Article 315 is prision correccional in its minimum period (6 months, 1 day to 2 years and 4 months) to prision correccional in its medium period (2 years, 4 months and 1 day to 4 years and 2 months). From this, the minimum term of the indeterminate sentence shall be taken. The trial court sentenced appellant to suffer imprisonment of 1 year, 8 months and 21 days of prision correccional as minimum to 5 years, 5 months and 11 days of prision correccional as maximum. This indeterminate sentence is within the maximum and minimum terms as determined above. The penalty imposed for estafa is correct. The trial court, however, erred in awarding private complainants Genteroy and Onza the amount of P10,000.00 each as actual damages in the illegal recruitment case (Crim. Case No. 92-108577). Previously, the MeTC in the estafa cases Genteroy and Onza filed (Case Nos. 286919-20) ordered appellant to pay private complainants the same amounts. Section 1, Rule 111 of the Rules of Court provides that, "In no case may the offended party recover damages twice for the same act or omission of the accused." The rate of six percent (6%) per annum as interest imposed on the actual damages of P18,000.00 awarded to private complainant Durano is also erroneous. As the amount of P18,000.00 given by Durano in consideration of his placement constitutes a loan or forbearance of money, the rate of interest should be twelve percent (12%) per annum in line with this Court’s pronouncement in Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals:80 II. With regard particularly to an award of interest in the concept of actual or compensatory damages, the rate of interest, as well as the accrual thereof, is imposed, as follows: 1. When the obligation is breached, and it consists in the payment of a sum of money, i.e., a loan or forbearance of money, the interest due should be that which may have been stipulated in writing. Furthermore, the interest due shall itself earn legal interest from the time it is judicially demanded. In the absence of stipulation, the rate of interest shall be 12% per annum to be computed from default, i.e., from judicial or extrajudicial demand under and subject to the provisions of Article 1169 of the Civil Code. 81 WHEREFORE, in Criminal Case No. 92-108577, appellant Crispin Billaber y Matbanua is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of illegal recruitment in large scale under Article 38 of the Labor Code, as amended, and sentences him to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and to pay a fine of P100,000.00, plus the costs. Accused-appellant is further ordered to pay to private complainant Raul Durano the sum of P18,000.00 as actual damages, with interest thereon at the rate of 12% per annum from July 27, 1992, the date of filing of this criminal case, until the amount shall have been fully paid. In Criminal Case No. 92-108578, appellant is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of estafa under Article 315 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code and sentences him to suffer the indeterminate penalty 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 and to pay the costs. SO ORDERED. Puno, (Chairman), Quisumbing, Austria-Martinez, and Callejo, Sr., JJ., concur.