6/8/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly her alone but for the whole group, she would not have kept it. Considering petitioner's eleven years of service with the company, we can hardly deem such infraction as an act of defrauding the company. We find no basis for petitioner's dismissal. WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The assailed decision of the NLRC is REVERSED and the decision of the Labor Arbiter is REINSTATED. SO ORDERED. Bellosillo, Vitug, and Hermosisima, Jr., JJ., concur. Padilla, J., (Chairman), On Leave [1] Rollo, p. 47. [2] Pepsi Co. v. NLRC, 210 SCRA 277 (1992). [3] PCIB v. NLRC, 247 SCRA 614 (1995). [4] Rollo, p. 33. [5] Rollo, p. 114. [6] Id., at 44. Source: Supreme Court E-Library This page was dynamically generated by the E-Library Content Management System (E-LibCMS) elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/34867 5/5