physician, Dr. Villena.[5] An open-heart surgery was then performed on Tuazon. He shouldered all the costs and expenses. Tuazon then filed a complaint asking for sickness and disability benefits with the POEA. On January 19, 1995, the POEA rendered a decision, the dispositive portion of which states: "WHEREFORE, foregoing premises considered, respondent Seagull Shipmanagement and Transport, Inc. and Dominion Insurance Corporation are hereby ordered jointly and severally liable to pay complainant, Benjamin Tuazon, the following: 1.....US$2,200 representing 120 days sickness benefits; 2.....100% for permanent disability in the amount of US$15,00[0].00 representing the disability benefits provided for under Appendix "A" of the POEA Standard Contract. SO ORDERED."[6] Esmsc On appeal the NLRC affirmed the findings of the POEA and dismissed the appeal for lack of merit. In its Resolution dated November 24, 1995 the NLRC held in part, "It must be stated, at the outset that the appeal is not impressed with merit. The preponderance of evidence indicates that complainant was repatriated due to an illness sustained during the period of his employment with the respondent. Moreover, it was sufficiently established that respondent's physician already knew, as early as June 1989, of the existence of complainant's pacemaker. This is, indeed, precisely the reason why he was asked to submit a medical certificate to the effect that he could do normal physical activities." (p. 3 of Administrator's Decision; Rollo, p. 141)[7] Dissatisfied, petitioners now claim before us that the NLRC erred: I........ IN AFFIRMING THE FINDINGS OF POEA THAT IT WAS SUFFICIENTLY ESTABLISHED THAT PETITIONER'S PHYSICIAN KNEW OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE PACEMAKER INSERTED IN PRIVATE RESPONDENT II........ IN NOT FINDING THAT PRIVATE RESPONDENT MISREPRESENTED AND/OR DID NOT MAKE A FULL DISCLOSURE OF HIS STATE OF HEALTH AND/OR MEDICAL HISTORY