6/9/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly airport transfer and courier services. Clearly, neither she nor her agents had a license to recruit Palo to work abroad. It is the lack of the necessary license or authority that renders the recruitment unlawful or criminal.[14] Thus, as against the positive and categorical testimonies of Palo and Caraig, appellant's denials cannot prevail.[15] Moreover, there is no reason to overturn the trial and appellate courts' findings on the credibility of the prosecution witnesses as there is no showing that any of them had ill motives against appellant or her co-accused and especially since it appears they were motivated solely by the desire to bring appellant and her co-accused to justice for the crimes they have committed.[16] Neither can this Court sustain appellant's contention that her participation in the recruitment is negated by the fact that her signature does not even appear on the vouchers issued to Palo. Even if Palo did not present receipts signed by appellant, this would not rule out the fact that appellant did receive the money. This Court has consistently ruled that absence of receipts as to the amounts delivered to a recruiter does not mean that the recruiter did not accept or receive such payments. Neither in the Statute of Frauds nor in the rules of evidence is the presentation of receipts required in order to prove the existence of a recruitment agreement and the procurement of fees in illegal recruitment cases. Such proof may come from the credible testimonies of witnesses[17] as in the case at bar. We likewise uphold appellant's conviction for estafa. A person who is convicted of illegal recruitment may also be convicted of estafa under Article 315(2) (a) of the Revised Penal Code provided the elements of estafa are present. Estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code is committed by any person who defrauds another by using a fictitious name, or falsely pretends to possess power, influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions, or by means of similar deceits executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud. The offended party must have relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means of the accused and as a result thereof, the offended party suffered damage.[18] Such is the case before us. Palo parted with her money upon enticement of appellant and her co-accused on the false pretense capacity to deploy her for employment in Australia. Unfortunately, not able to work abroad nor get her Australian visa. Worse, she did back. the prodding and that they had the however, Palo was not get her money As to the penalties, Section 7 of Republic Act No. 8042[19] or the Migrant Workers' Act of 1995 provides the penalties for illegal recruitment: SEC. 7. Penalties.— (a) Any person found guilty of illegal recruitment shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of not less than six (6) years and one (1) day but not more than twelve (12) years and a fine not less than Two hundred thousand pesos (P200,000.00) nor more than Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00). elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/50218 5/8