5/19/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly to the airport because accused-appellant did not return her passport and other travel documents after suppossedly processing her papers at the POEA.[73] As regards Cherry and Jill, accused-appellant cannot impute fault on them for not having paid the full amount of:P65,000.00 each. The CA correctly observed that while both Cherry and Jill were not able to pay the full amount, the accused-appellant still accepted the partial amount of P45,000.00 from each of them. The accused-appellant then admitted, during cross-examination, that she shouldered the remaining P15,000.00 in Cherry and Jill's respective applications.[74] Moreover, while accused-appellant alleged in her testimony that Cherry and Jill's foreign principals in Canada are New Hope and Global, respectively, she failed to present any evidence to prove her allegation and at least show that there is in fact an available employment for Cherry and Jill.[75] Finally, while accused-appellant imputes fault on Cherry and Jill for failing to pass the interviews at the US Embassy as part of their job application in the US and after their employment in Canada failed to materialize, the Court does not find this fact prejudicial to the case of the prosecution. In the first place, accused-appellant failed to identify Cherry and Jill's foreign principals in the US. This gives credence to the RTC's factual finding, which was affirmed by the CA, that their visa applications were denied by the US Embassy because there was no proof of employment for them in the US.[76] Estafa under Article 315(2)(a) of the RPC As to the charge of Estafa under paragraph 2(a), Article 315 of the RPC provides in part: Art. 315. Swindling (estafa). - Any person who shall defraud another by any of the means mentioned hereinbelow shall be punished by: xxxx 2. By means of any of the following false pretenses or fraudulent acts executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud: (a) By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending to possess power, influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions, or by means of other similar deceits. The elements of Estafa under paragraph 2(a), Article 315 of the RPC are as follows: (1) there must be a false pretense, fraudulent acts or fraudulent means; (2) such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means must be made or executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud; (3) the offended party must have relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means and was thus induced to part with his money or property; and (4) as a result thereof, the offended party suffered damage.[77] https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66373 11/17