The evidence has satisfactorily established that the complainants have not been reimbursed the full amount of their placement fees, notwithstanding their persistent demands. Not a single peso of his placement fee was returned to Elmer Janer. Instead, on April 30, 1998, the accused executed a promissory note (Exhibit K) in behalf of the Alvis Placement Service Corporation, undertaking to pay Elmer Janer the amount of P75,000.00 on May 6, 1998. However, the amount covered by the promissory note was not paid (TSN, Sept. 7, 1999, p. 11). On the other hand, although Eric Farol and Elmer Ramos were reimbursed of P11,000.00 and P5,000.00 in cash, respectively, and the balance of their placement fees were covered by checks (Exhibits D-2 and G), these transactions did not relieve the accused of her criminal liability. The reimbursement contemplated by paragraph (m) of Section 6 of Republic Act No. 8042 is full reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the worker in connection with the documentation and processing of his deployment. To rule otherwise would be offensive to the administration of justice, as illegal recruiters could easily escape criminal liability with impunity by simply returning an insignificant portion of the amount they collected from the worker. The checks drawn and issued by the accused to these two complainants, however, did not produce the effect of payment, for they were both dishonored by the drawee bank on the ground of closed account. Pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 1249 of the Civil Code, "(t)he delivery of promissory notes payable to order, or bills of exchange or other mercantile documents shall produce the effect of payment only when they have been cashed, or when through the fault of the creditor they have been impaired."12 The appellant's bare denial of her involvement in the management, administration, control and operation of APSC cannot prevail over her judicial admissions, the positive testimonies of the private complainants and the documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution. Section 6 of Rep. Act No. 8042 provides that illegal recruitment shall be considered an offense involving economic sabotage if committed in large scale, viz, committed against three (3) or more persons individually or as a group, the imposable penalty for which is life imprisonment and a fine of not less than P500,000.00 nor more than P1,000,000.00.13 In this case, there are three private complainants, namely, Elmer Janer, Eric Farol and Elmer Ramos. The trial court, thus, correctly convicted the appellant of large scale illegal recruitment and sentenced her to suffer life imprisonment. IN LIGHT OF ALL THE FOREGOING, the appeal is DENIED. The Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 35, is AFFIRMED. Costs against the appellant. SO ORDERED. Puno, (Chairman), Quisumbing, Austria-Martinez, and Tinga, JJ., concur. Footnotes 1 Penned by Judge Ramon P. Makasiar. 2 Records, p. 1. 3 Rollo, pp. 81-88. 4 Id. at 53-56. 5 Records, p. 227. 6 Rollo, pp. 56-57. 7 Otherwise known as the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995. 8 Id. at 353. 9 Records, p. 226. 10 354 SCRA 553 (2001). 11 Id. at 561-562. 12 Records, pp. 65-66. 13 Section 7(b), Republic Act No. 8042.