G.R. No. 128583 ; November 22, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JOSEPHINE FAJARDO, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Josephine Fajardo, along with her sister Virgie Lanchita (at large), was charged with one count of large-scale illegal recruitment and seven counts of estafa. The Information alleged that from March to July 1993, in Pasay City, they conspired to recruit seven individuals—Randy Balsomo, Lamberto Balasa, Ruben Porras, Eduardo Amiscua, Domingo Lequillo, Benedicto Daria, and Arthur Aposaga—for overseas employment without securing the required license from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA). The prosecution established that the complainants, seeking work abroad, were introduced to Fajardo and Lanchita at an office purportedly connected to L.A. Worldwide Manpower. The sisters required and received processing and placement fees totaling up to P60,000 from each complainant, promising deployment to Japan. The complainants were never deployed, and demands for refund were ignored.
POEA certification confirmed that neither Fajardo nor Lanchita was licensed to recruit workers. In her defense, Fajardo claimed she was merely an employee of a licensed agency, acting under the authority of her employer, Mr. Ishwar Pamani, and that she received the fees on his behalf. The Regional Trial Court convicted Fajardo of large-scale illegal recruitment and five counts of estafa, imposing penalties including life imprisonment and indemnification of the complainants.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Josephine Fajardo is guilty of large-scale illegal recruitment and multiple counts of estafa.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions. On illegal recruitment, the Court held that the elements were conclusively established: (1) Fajardo undertook recruitment activities by promising overseas employment to the complainants; (2) she charged fees for these services; and (3) she did so without the necessary license or authority from the POEA, as certified by the agency. The defense of acting under a licensed principal fails. The law explicitly prohibits individuals from recruiting without a license, and a person acting within the premises of a licensed agency does not automatically share that license. Fajardo’s name was not included in the agency’s list of authorized personnel submitted to the POEA, severing any legal link to a licensed entity. With illegal recruitment committed against three or more persons, it constitutes large-scale illegal recruitment under the law, warranting the penalty of life imprisonment.
Regarding estafa, the Court found all elements present under Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code. Fajardo, through false pretenses and fraudulent representation of her capacity to secure overseas employment, induced the complainants to part with their money. There was clear deceit, as she knowingly misrepresented her authority. The complainants suffered damage by paying substantial amounts which were misappropriated, as no employment was procured. Each transaction with a different complainant constitutes a distinct crime of estafa. The Court modified the penalties for estafa to conform to the Indeterminate Sentence Law, setting minimum terms within the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed. The affirmance of the trial court’s factual findings, including the credibility of witnesses, is final, as no compelling reason was shown to overturn them.