G.R. No. 48169 , December 28, 1942
MANUEL S. CONCEPCION, petitioner, vs. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.

FACTS

The petitioner, Manuel S. Concepcion, a civil engineer, gratuitously offered his services to direct and administer the construction of a house for his niece, the complainant. For this purpose, he received from her the amount of P753.54 to be used for purchasing materials and paying laborers’ wages. Of this amount, he spent only P39.55 for materials and had not paid anything for labor at the time of the trial.

ISSUE

Whether the petitioner is guilty of estafa under Article 315, paragraph 1(b) of the Revised Penal Code, considering the absence of a clear finding of misappropriation or conversion of the funds received.

RULING

The Supreme Court acquitted the petitioner. The essence of estafa under the cited provision is the act of misappropriating or converting money, goods, or personal property to the prejudice of another. The Court of Appeals’ decision did not contain a clear and positive finding that the petitioner had actually misappropriated or converted the amount involved. The mere fact that he had spent only P39.55 on materials and had not paid the laborers at the time of trial does not, in itself, prove misappropriation or conversion of the remaining sum.
Additionally, the parties did not fix a definite period for completing the construction, though they intended one. Under Article 1128 of the Civil Code, if parties intended a period but did not specify it, the courts must fix the period for compliance. The Court of Appeals failed to do so, and the record does not show when the P39.55 was paid, when the laborers were unpaid, or the time elapsed between receipt of the money and the work stoppage. Thus, it is difficult to conclude that the petitioner unreasonably delayed the work. Even assuming delay, such delay does not per se constitute misappropriation or conversion.