G.R. Nos. 114011-22 December 16, 1996
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. VEVINA BUEMIO, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Vevina Buemio, a field officer of a travel agency, was charged with illegal recruitment in large scale and multiple counts of estafa. The prosecution established that Buemio, without any license or authority from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA), recruited several individuals for overseas employment in Japan. She promised jobs as factory workers with high salaries, collected substantial placement fees ranging from P60,000 to P150,000 from complainants including Cecilia Baas, Eliseo Principe, Eduardo Gutierrez, and Ramon Villanueva, and issued receipts for these payments. The recruits were instead sent to Korea with falsified passports and tickets, where Buemio failed to secure their promised onward travel to Japan, ultimately advising them to return to the Philippines without fulfilling her commitments or returning their money.
The Regional Trial Court of Pasay City found Buemio guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal recruitment in large scale under Article 39 of the Labor Code, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 2018, sentencing her to life imprisonment and a fine of P100,000. The trial court, however, failed to render a verdict on the eleven separate estafa cases consolidated with the illegal recruitment case. Buemio appealed, challenging the credibility of witnesses and the sufficiency of evidence proving her guilt.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Vevina Buemio is guilty of illegal recruitment in large scale. A secondary procedural issue concerns the trial court’s omission to rule on the consolidated estafa cases.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for illegal recruitment in large scale. The legal logic is clear: illegal recruitment is committed by any person who, without the requisite license or authority from the POEA, undertakes any recruitment activity as defined under Article 13(b) of the Labor Code. Recruitment in large scale, under Article 38(b), elevates the offense when it is committed against three or more persons individually or as a group. The evidence conclusively showed Buemio engaged in recruitment acts—canvassing, enlisting, and promising employment—without POEA authority. The testimonies of multiple complainants, corroborated by receipts she issued, established she recruited at least three persons, satisfying the element of large scale. Her defense of denial could not overcome this positive evidence. The Court modified the decision to order restitution of the placement fees to the complainants, as the amounts collected are integral to the illegal act. Regarding the estafa cases, the Court noted the trial court’s failure to rule on them constituted a lapse. However, this omission does not affect the validity of the illegal recruitment conviction, as the crimes are distinct and punishable separately under different statutes. The case was remanded to the trial court for appropriate action on the estafa charges.