September 2011 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
[G.R. No. 191191 : September 21, 2011]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. SONIA BAGTANG
G.R. No. 191191 [*] (People of the Philippines v. Sonia Bagtang).
RESOLUTION
Sometime In 2003 and 2004 Emily V. Balasa, Ronnie S. Gappi, Eric Ferdinand O. Reglos, Alfredo I. Camia, Jr., and Ma. Salvacion C. Dy applied with Unicorn Services Corporation in Libtong, Meycauayan, Bulacan for employment in South Korea. Accused Sonia Bagtang, alleged manager of the firm, gave them forms to fill out and told them to submit documents that included their passports, NBI clearances, and photos. She also required them to undergo medical examination, take up Korean language classes for a fee, and pay the placement and processing fees.
Bagtang assured the applicants that they would be employed in South Korea. Indeed, she asked them to sign contracts, written in Korean language, with the exception of the salary they would get and the factory where they would work, which were written in English. Acting on these representations, Balasa paid Bagtang P100,000.00 while the rest paid her P90,000.00 each. As it turned out, none of them were ever deployed to South Korea. They demanded the return of their documents and what they paid her but she failed to do so.[1]
The government filed two kinds of informations against Bagtang: one count of illegal recruitment in large scale in Criminal Case 300I-M-2004[2] and five counts of estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2 (a) of the Revised Penal Code[3] in Criminal Cases 3004-M-2004,[4] 3005-M-2004, 3006-M-2004, 3009-M-2004, and 3010-M-2004.[5]
The parties stipulated at the pre-trial conference that Bagtang was not licensed to recruit workers; that she received the money; and that she had no license to recruit in her personal capacity or as representative of K Lexus or Unicorn Services although she worked for both agencies.[6]
On March 27, 2008 the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Malolos City, Bulacan rendered a consolidated decision in the above cases, finding Bagtang guilty in all of them. The RTC sentenced her to life imprisonment in the large scale illegal recruitment case and to imprisonment that ranged from 4 years and 2 months to 17 or 18 years. In addition, the RTC ordered Bagtang to return the money that the complainants paid her. She appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals (CA).
On October 7, 2009 the CA affirmed with modification the RTC Decision as follows:[7]
Bagtang thus appealed to this Court.(i) In Criminal Case No. 3001-M-2004, aside from life imprisonment, accused-appellant is ordered to pay the fine of P1,000,000.00;
(ii) In Criminal Case No. 3004-M-2004, accused-appcllant is meted four (4) years and two (2) mouths of prision correccional, as minimum, to fifteen (15) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum; and,
(iii) In each of Criminal Cases Nos. 3005-M-2004, 3006-M-2004, 3009-M-2004 and 3010-M-2004, accused-appellant is meted four (4) years and two (2) months of prision correccional, as minimum, to fourteen (14) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum.
The RTC and the CA are one in finding that Bagtang recruited complainant job applicants for work in South Korea although she had no license or authority to do so. The stipulations she entered into during the pre-trial conference show such lack of license or authority. Since the Court is not a trier of facts and, in the absence of controverting evidence, it has no reason to disturb the findings in question.
Bagtang's defense that she was merely doing her duties as employee of a recruitment agency does not absolve her of liability. She introduced herself as the manager of such agency. Her bare allegations pitted against the narrations of the private complainant cannot be given greater evidentiary weight.
As correctly found by the CA, Bagtang represented herself to her victims as having the capacity to send factory workers to South Korea even without authority or license from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration. Her false claims induced them to give her money for processing and placement. She failed to return the same upon demand.[8]cralaw
WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the Court of Appeals Decision in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. 03306 dated October 7, 2009.
SO ORDERED.
Very truly yours,
LUCITA ABJELINA-SORIANO
Division Clerk of Court
By:
(Sgd.) WILFREDO V. LAPITAN
Deputy Division Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[*] J. Peralta, no part. J. Brion, additional member, per raffle dated September 21, 2011.
[1] Rollo, p. 3
[2] Id. at 4.
[3] Id. at 3-4.
[4] Id. at 5.
[5] Id. at 5-6.
[6] Id. at 6.
[7] Id. at 20-21. Penned by Associate Justice Fernanda Lampas Peralta and concurred in by Associate Justices Portia Ali�o-Hormachuelos and Ramon R. Garcia.
[8] Id. at 17.