6/7/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly WHEREFORE, in Criminal Case No. 05-412, this Court finds the accused Michelle Dela Cruz guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Article 38 (b) of the Labor Code, as amended, in relation to Article 13 (b) and 34 of the same Code (Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale) and hereby sentences her to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and pay a fine of P500,000.00. Accused is further ordered to pay complainant Armely Aguilar-Uy the amount of P40,000.00 as actual or compensatory damages. In Criminal Case No. 05-413, this Court finds the accused Michell Dela Cruz guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Estafa under Article 315, par. 2 (a) of the Revised Penal Code and hereby sentences her to a prison term ranging from two (2) years, eleven (11) months and eleven (11) days of prision correccional as minimum up to eight (8) years of prision mayor as maximum. In Criminal Cases Nos. 05-414 and 05-415, accused Michelle Dela Cruz is hereby ACQUITTED of the crime charged for insufficiency of evidence. SO ORDERED.[38] The RTC was unconvinced by the defense of alibi and denial interposed by appellant. The trial court relied on the testimony of Rosalina Rosales of the Licensing Division of the POEA who confirmed that appellant is not licensed to recruit workers for overseas employment. It likewise accorded greater weight to the testimonies of private complainants who positively identified appellant as the person who recruited them for employment in South Korea and received the placement fees. The court a quo also found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of estafa for misrepresenting herself as having the power and capacity to recruit and place private complainants as domestic helpers in South Korea. Such misrepresentation, the trial court stressed, induced private complainants to part with their money. Unperturbed, appellant appealed the trial court's decision before the Court of Appeals. On July 2, 2013, in its disputed Decision,[39] the Court of Appeals denied the appellant's appeal for lack of merit. Hence, this appeal, raising the same issues brought before the appellate court, to wit: I WHETHER THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING ACCUSEDAPPELLANT GUILTY DESPITE THE PROSECUTION'S FAILURE TO PROVE HER GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. II elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/63140 7/18