Decision G.R. No. 235562 14 (b) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse: Provided, That when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age, the perpetrators shall be prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 3, for rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal Code, for rape or lascivious conduct, as the case may be: Provided, That the penalty for lascivious conduct when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age shall be reclusion temporal in its medium period. XXX ~ Sec. 31. Common Penal Provisions. XXX (f) A fine to be determined by the court shall be imposed and administered as a cash fund by the Department of Social Welfare and Development and disbursed for the rehabilitation of each child victim, or any immediate member of his family if the latter is the perpetrator of the offense. People v. Caoili41 applied the foregoing provisions in this wise: Considering that AAA was over 12 but under 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the lascivious act, the imposable penalty is reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion perpetua. Since the crime was committed by the father of the offended party, the alternative circumstance ofrelationship should be appreciated. In crimes against chastity, such as acts of lasciviousness, relationship is always aggravating. With the presence of this aggravating circumstance and no mitigating circumstance, the penalty shall be applied in its maximum period, i.e., reclusion perpetua, without eligibility of parole. This is in consonance with Section 3l(c) ofR.A. No. 7610 which expressly provides that the penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period when the perpetrator is, inter alia, the parent of the victim. Likewise, Section 31(f) of R.A. No. 7610 imposes a fine upon the perpetrator, which jurisprudence pegs in the amount of Php 15,000. As for the appropriate monetary awards, Caoili decreed: Parenthetically, considering the gravity and seriousness of the offense, taken together with the evidence presented against Caoili, this Court finds it proper to award damages. In light of recent jurisprudential rules, when the circumstances surrounding the crime call for the imposition of reclusion perpetua, the victim is entitled to civil indemnity, moral damages and exemplary damages each in the amount of Php 75,000.00, regardless of the numb~r of qualifying aggravating circumstances present. 41 815 Phil. 839, 896-897 (2017). i