(b) Illegal Recruitment when committed by a syndicate or in large scale shall be considered an offense involving economic sabotage and shall be penalized in accordance with Article 39 hereof. Illegal recruitment is deemed committed by a syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons conspiring and/or confederating with one another in carrying out any unlawful or illegal transaction, enterprise or scheme defined under the first paragraph hereof. Illegal recruitment is deemed committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more persons individually or as a group. x x x. Article 39 of the Labor Code, in turn, provides: Article 38. Illegal Recruitment. --- (a) The penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000) shall be imposed if illegal recruitment constitutes economic sabotage as defined herein; x x x. The elements of illegal recruitment in large scale are: (1) the person undertakes any recruitment activity defined under Article 13, paragraph (b), or any prohibited practice enumerated under Article 34 of the Labor Code; (2) said person does not have a license or authority to engage in the recruitment and placement of workers; and (3) the act is committed against three or more persons, individually or as a group. [23] All these three elements were proven by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. First, the complaining witnesses have satisfactorily established that appellant promised them employment and assured them of placement overseas. Appellant even had her office advertised in a newspaper, undoubtedly to reach more people seeking jobs abroad. Second, appellant did not have any license to recruit persons for overseas work. The Licensing Division of the POEA issued a certification to this effect. Third, appellant undertook the recruitment of not less than three workers. The complainants herein were recruited individually on different occasions. The law applies whether the workers were recruited individually or as a group. It is not material that complainants Mary Jane Aquino Villanueva and Wilfredo Tubale were not presented in court to substantiate their claims against appellant. The law applies if appellant committed the illegal act against at least three persons, individually or as a group. In the case at bar, the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that at least three persons were recruited by appellant: Ariston B. Villanueva, Alfred Bryant Berador and Frennie Majarucon. With respect to the credibility of these witnesses, it is settled that where the issue is on credibility, the findings of the trial court will generally not be disturbed. The trial court has the advantage of hearing the witnesses and observing their conduct during trial, circumstances that carry great weight in appreciating credibility.[24] The trial court is thus in a better position to settle such an issue.