Bernal and her co-employees were then conversing with Casis when appellant arrived. It was then that appellant overheard Bernal and her coemployees desire to work abroad. Appellant then inquired if Bernal and her co-employees were interested in securing jobs overseas. She informed them that as a recruiter, she sends applicants overseas (pp. 4-5, TSN, May 22, 1995). Casis then questioned her subordinates if they were interested. Appellant also delved from Bernal and her co-employees namely Paul Villanueva and Noel Manangguil if they desire to work abroad. The three apprised her of their interest. Appellant then invited and convinced them to apply for overseas employment by boasting her connections with the POEA. To sweeten her proposal, she left a calling card indicating that she was working with Mariners Consultant with postal address at Lot 2, Block 2, C. Burgos, Herrera Subdivision, Project 6, Quezon City with Pocketbell No. 7221162 and 817221 Pager No. 122586 (pp. 6-8, TSN, Ibid). In the last week of September, 1993 appellant went back to Adidas, Novaliches. On that occasion, appellant invited and convinced Bernal and others of her ability to send them abroad as factory workers in Taiwan. Appellant divulged to them that her husband is an employee of ABSCBN and a compare of Noli de Castro and Ted Failon (pp. 8-10, TSN, Ibid). She also detailed them about the requirements such as passport, NBI, Police Clearance, Birth Certificate, 12 (2x2) ID pictures and the placement fee (p. 11, TSN, Ibid). On November 16, 1993, Bernal, relying upon the representation of the appellant that she can leave for Taiwan as a factory worker paid her fifteen thousand pesos (P15,000.0) andsubmitted the needed requirements at appellants residence located at Lot 2, Block 2, Project 6, Quezon City. Appellant affixed her signature in a corresponding receipt in Bernals presence written as Mrs. E.N. Banzalez. Likewise, appellant also promised Bernal that she would be able to leave for Taiwan in December, 1993. However, Bernal was not able to leave in December 1993 and was informed by appellant that there was no job opening in Taiwan at that time (pp. 12-13, TSN, Ibid). Appellant promised Bernal to wait until January 1994. On January 1994, Bernal and the other applicants were not able to leave the country for the same reasons aforementioned. Due to appellants failure to send Bernal and her other co-employees abroad, the latter started getting suspicious and decided to call PRC to check if the appellant was really employed in that government agency. They were shocked to find out that no employee by the name of appellant Elizabeth Banzales works there (p. 14, TSN, Ibid). Bernal and friends also called ABSCBN to verify the veracity of appellants assertion that her husband was an