Decision 8 G.R. No. 229862 the word "statutory" in describing the crime, there was no effect in the imposed penalty. 62 Plaintiff-appellee insists that accused-appellant's guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt. 63 It was able to establish the following elements: First. [AAA] was then 14-year old when appellant had sexual intercourse with her. Second. Appellant who is the common-law husband of [AAA's] mother exercises moral ascendancy and authority over her. Third. [AAA] testified that appellant had carnal knowledge of her on April 12, 2006 at about 11 :00 o'clock (sic) in the morning while her mother went to the Barangay Hall to do an errand for appellant. 64 (Emphasis in the original) Plaintiff-appellee maintains that AAA' s narration of the incident proves that accused-appellant raped her. 65 It adds that recantations are usually viewed unfavorably since it can be secured by intimidating the witness or in exchange of monetary consideration. 66 It alleges that AAA's recantation was doubtful because BBB and accused-appellant continued their common-law relationship and AAA's new claim "was a mere legal conclusion, bereft of any details or other indicia of credibility, much less truth." 67 Finally, plaintiff-appellee contends that AAA's intact hymen is not fatal to its cause. In the crime of rape to be consummated, it is sufficient that the penis touched the pudendum or the labia. 68 The sole issue for this Court's resolution is whether or not accusedappellant ZZZ' s guilt for the crime of rape has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. In arguing for his innocence, accused-appellant maintains that the element of force, intimidation, threat, fraud, or grave abuse of authority in the crime of rape was not established, and that the element of the victim's minority in the crime of statutory rape was not proven. Moreover, AAA's recantation and her intact hymen both negate the allegation of rape. 62 63 64 6s 6 6 67 68 Id. Id. Id. Id. Id. Id. Id. at 72-76. at 70-72. at 72. at 76-78. at 77. at 78-79. I