6/7/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly To reiterate, settled is the rule that the findings and conclusion of the trial court on the credibility of witnesses are entitled to great respect because the trial courts have the advantage of observing the demeanor of witnesses as they testify.[19] The determination by the trial court of the credibility of witnesses, when affirmed by the appellate court, as in this case, is accorded full weight and credit as well as great respect, if not conclusive effect.[20] Ancnt the CA's modification as to the penalty imposed, this Court finds no reason for its correction. The trial court imposed the indeterminate penalty of six (6) years and one (1) day, as minimum, to eight (8) years, as maximum, for the crime of illegal recruitment in large scale, whereas the proper penalty should have been life imprisonment, as provided under Section 7 (b) of R.A. 8042. As ruled by the CA: Be that as it may, this Court finds reversible error on the part of the trial court respecting the penalty imposed on the appellant for the crime of large scale illegal recruitment. Under the last paragraph of Section 6 of R.A. 8042, illegal recruitment shall be considered an offense involving economic sabotage if committed in large scale, viz., committed against three or more persons individually or as a group. In the present case, six (6) private complainants testified against appellant's acts of illegal recruitment, thereby rendering her acts tantamount to economic sabotage. Under Section 7 (b) of R.A. 8042, the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of not less than P500.000.00 nor more than P1,000,000.00 shall be imposed if illegal recruitment constitutes economic sabotage. Nevertheless, the CA erred in not increasing the amount of fine imposed by the RFC. In modifying the penalty to life imprisonment, the CA cited Section 7 (b) of R.A. 8042 because the present case involves economic sabotage, however, the same provision reads, [t]he penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of not less than five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) nor more than one million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be imposed if illegal recruitment constitutes economic sabotage. Hence, the fine imposed should have been not less than five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) nor more than one million pesos (P1,000,000.00) and not two hundred thousand pesos (P200,000.00) as ruled by the RTC and the CA. WHEREFORE, the appeal is DISMISSED and the Court of Appeals Decision dated March 11, 2010 is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that accused-appellant Ma. Fe Torres Solina a.k.a. Ma Fe Baylon Gallo is ORDERED to PAY a fine in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand (P500,000.00) Pesos with subsidiary liability in case of insolvency, instead of the P200,000.00 adjudged earlier by the RTC and the CA for the crime of illegal recruitment in large scale. Anent the six (6) counts of Estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2 (a), Revised Penal Code, accused-appellant is ORDERED to RETURN to each private complainant the amount of Twenty Thousand Pesos (P20,000.00), plus the legal interest of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of judgment until fully paid, as actual damages. SO ORDERED. elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/61569 8/10