6/9/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Article 13(b) of the same Code defines "recruitment and placement" as: "any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring or procuring workers, and includes referrals, contract services, promising or advertising for employment, locally or abroad, whether for profit or not: Provided, that any person or entity which, in any manner, offers or promises for a fee employment to two or more persons shall be deemed engaged in recruitment and placement." To prove illegal recruitment, only two elements need be shown: (1) the person charged with the crime must have undertaken recruitment activities; and (2) the said person does not have a license or authority to do so. A license is a document issued by the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) authorizing a person or entity to operate a private employment agency, while an authority is a document issued by the DOLE authorizing a person or association to engage in recruitment and placement activities as a private recruitment agency.[12] Large scale illegal recruitment is punishable by life imprisonment and a fine of P100,000.00 under Article 39(a) of the Labor Code.[13] In the instant case, appellant clearly committed large scale illegal recruitment as she recruited at least three persons, giving them the impression that she had the capability of sending them abroad for assured jobs in Saudi Arabia, and collecting various amounts allegedly for processing and placement fees without license or authority to do so. Against the prosecution's overwhelming evidence, appellant could only offer a bare denial and an obviously concocted story that it was her suitor who actually recruited the various complainants and not she. This suitor was never presented to corroborate her statements, nor were other evidence presented to cast even an iota of doubt on the testimony of the prosecution's witnesses. After a thorough and painstaking review, the Court is satisfied that there is nothing in the records to signify that the trial court ignored or misappreciated substantial facts as would warrant a reversal of its findings and conclusions.[14] As we declared in People v. Naparan, Jr.:[15] "Nitong mga nakaraang buwan, ang pansin ng sambayanan ay natuon sa mga krimen na karumaldumal na katulad ng pagpatay at pagsasamantala sa ating mga kababaihan. Wari ay nakaligtaan natin ang mga salarin na di nahuhuli sa mga mamamatay tao. Sila rin ay nagsasamantala sa mga inosente at walang malay. Ang kaibhan nga lamang ay ang kanilang biktima ay yaong ating mga kababayan na nangangarap na mangibang bayan upang sila ay mahango sa karalitaan sampu ng kanilang pamilya. Sa masidhi nilang hangarin, halos hindi nagdadalawang-isip kapag may balanang nangangako na ipadadala sila sa mga bayang nakaririwasa kung elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/34466 5/7