6/9/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly has earlier found to have willfully perjured himself. "x x x (T)he testimony of a witness may be believed in part and disbelieved in part, depending upon the corroborative evidence and the probabilities and improbabilities of the case."[23] In the case at bar, we hold that the trial court did not err in giving credence to the testimony of Esclada against appellant Botero since it was corroborated on its material points by the testimony of other witnesses. In fact, Esclada's testimony against Botero is trustworthy as he gave it after his conscience bothered him for not telling the truth. We reject appellant Botero's pretense that he is also a victim rather than a culprit in this case. He insist he was a mere applicant of Ricorn and not a conspirator of the other accused who defrauded the complainants. He claims that even as a Ricorn employee, he merely performed "minimal activities" like following-up applicants' passports, seaman's book and SOLAS, and conducting simple interviews. He denies he had a hand in the selection of workers to be employed abroad.[24] These submissions are at war with the evidence on record. His co-accused Garcia introduced him to the complainants as the vice-president of Ricorn. He used a table with a nameplate confirming he was the vice-president of Ricorn.[25] He procured the passports, seaman's books and SOLAS for the applicants. It was from him that the complainants inquired about the status of their applications.[26] He also admitted he gave money to accused Garcia for Ricorn's incorporation. Beyond any reasonable doubt, appellant Botero engaged in recruitment and placement activities in that he, through Ricorn, promised the complainants employment abroad. Under the Labor Code, recruitment and placement refers to "any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring or procuring workers, and includes referrals, contract services, promising or advertising for employment, locally or abroad whether for profit or not: Provided, That any person or entity which in any manner, offers or promises for a fee employment to two or more persons shall be deemed engaged in recruitment and placement."[27] All the essential elements of the crime of illegal recruitment in large scale are present in this case, to wit: "(1) the accused engages in the recruitment and placement of workers, as defined under Article 13 (b) or in any prohibited activities under Article 34 of the Labor Code; "(2) accused has not complied with the guidelines issued by the Secretary of Labor and Employment, particularly with respect to the securing of a license or an authority to recruit and deploy workers, either locally or overseas; and "(3) accused commits the same against three (3) or more persons, individually or as a group."[28] It is a fact that Ricorn had no license to recruit from DOLE. In the office of Ricorn, a notice was posted informing job applicants that its recruitment license is still being processed. Yet, Ricorn already entertained applicants and collected fees for processing their travel documents.[29] elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/34714 5/8