Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Tan Tiong Meng G.R. No. 120835-40
Tan Tiong Meng G.R. No. 120835-40
120835-40
Today is Tuesday, September 03, 2019
Custom Search
Constitution Statutes Executive Issuances Judicial Issuances Other Issuances Jurisprudence International Legal Resources AUSL Exclusive
FIRST DIVISION
PADILLA, J.:
Accused-appellant Tan Tiong Meng alias "Tommy Tan" was charged with Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale and six
(6) counts of estafa.
That on or about the period comprising June 1993 to August, 1993, in the City of Cavite, Republic of
the Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, using a
business name RAINBOW SIM FACTORY, a private employment recruiting agency, and
misrepresenting himself to have the capacity to contract, enlist and transport Filipino workers for
employment abroad with the ability to facilitate the issuance and approval of the necessary papers in
connection therewith, when in fact he did not possess the authority or license from the Philippine
Overseas Employment Administration to do so, did, then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and knowingly
for a fee, recruit in a large scale and promise employment in Taiwan to the following persons, to wit:
as in fact, the said persons gave and delivered the abovestated amount, respectively, to the herein
accused who know fully well that the aforesaid persons could not be sent to Taiwan, to the damage and
prejudice of said aforementioned private complainants. 1
The informations for estafa aver substantially the same allegations as follows:
That on or about June 7, 1993, in the City of Cavite, Republic of the Philippines and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused by means of false representations that
he can secure an employment in Taiwan for Ernesto Orcullo y Nicolas as a factory worker induced the
latter to entrust to him the amount of P15,000.00, in consideration of the promised employment, but the
herein accused, once in possession of the amount, with intent to defraud, with grave abuse of
confidence and without fulfilling his promise, did, then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and knowingly,
misapply, misappropriate and convert the same to his own personal use and benefit and
notwithstanding repeated demands made upon him for the return of the amount, accused herein failed
and refused to do so, to the damage and prejudice of Ernesto Orcullo y Nicolas in the amount of
P15,000.00, Philippine Currency.2
The other informations for estafa involve the following complainants and amounts
Accused-appellant pleaded not guilty to all the informations and all seven (7) cases were tried jointly.
On 12 May 1995, the Regional Trial Court, Branch 88, Cavite City rendered a decision * the dispositive part of which
reads:
1. In Criminal Case No. 278-93, the Court finds the accused GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the
crime of illegal recruitment in large scale defined and penalized under Article 38 of the Labor Code, as
amended in relation to Article 39 thereof, and hereby sentences him to a penalty of life imprisonment,
and to pay a fine of P100,000, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency;
2. In Criminal Case No. 277-93, the Court finds the accused GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the
crime of Estafa defined and penalized under Article 315 (2) (a) of the Revised Penal Code and hereby
sentences him to a penalty of imprisonment of two (2) years as minimum, to six (6) years as the
maximum; and to pay ERNESTO ORCULLO the sum of P15,000 as actual damages and P15,000 as
moral and exemplary damages;
3. In Criminal Case No. 279-93, the Court finds the accused GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the
crime of Estafa defined and penalized under Article 315 (2) (a) of the Revised Penal Code, and hereby
sentences him to a penalty of imprisonment of two (2) years as minimum, to six (6) years as the
https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1997/apr1997/gr_120835_1997.html 1/4
9/3/2019 G.R. No. 120835-40
maximum, and to pay NEIL MASCARDO the sum of P15,000 as actual damages and P15,000 as
moral and exemplary damages;
4. In Criminal Case No. 280-93, the Court finds the accused GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the
crime of Estafa defined and penalized under Article 315 (2) (a) of the Revised Penal Code and hereby
sentences him to a penalty of imprisonment of two (2) years as minimum, to six (6) years as maximum;
and to pay MANUEL LATINA the sum of P15,000 as actual damages, and P15,000 as moral and
exemplary damages;
5. In Criminal Case No. 343-93, the Court finds the accused GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the
crime of Estafa defined and penalized under Article 315 (2) (a) of the Revised Penal Code, and hereby
sentences him to a penalty of imprisonment of two (2) years as minimum, to six (6) years as maximum;
and to pay RICARDO GREPO the sum of P20,000 as actual damages and P20,000 as moral and
exemplary damages;
6. In Criminal Case No. 365-93, the Court finds the accused GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the
crime of Estafa defined and penalized under Article 315 (2) (a) of the Revised Penal Code, and hereby
sentences him to a penalty of imprisonment of two (2) years as minimum, to six (6) years as maximum
and to pay LIBRADO POZAS the sum of P15,000 as actual damages and P15,000 as moral and
exemplary damages;
7. In Criminal Case No. 371-93, the Court finds the accused GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the
crime of Estafa defined and penalized under Article 315 (2) (a) of the Revised Penal Code, and hereby
sentences him to a penalty of imprisonment of two (2) years as minimum, to six (6) years as maximum;
and to pay GAVINO ASIMAN the sum of P15,000 as actual damages and P15,000 as moral and
exemplary damages.
In addition to the foregoing penalties, the accused being an alien, shall be deported without further
proceedings after service of sentence.
In the service of his sentence, the accused shall be credited with the full time during which he
underwent preventive imprisonment, provided he voluntarily agreed in writing to abide by the same
disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, otherwise, he shall be credited with only four-fifths
(4/5) thereof (Article 29, RPC, as amended by RA No. 6127 and BP Blg. 85)
SO ORDERED.3
On appeal to this Court, accused-appellant assigns a single error allegedly committed by the trial court, thus:
THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED GUILTY BEYOND
REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE OFFENSE OF ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT IN A LARGE SCALE
UNDER CRIMINAL CASE NO. 278-93 AND ESTAFA IN CRIMINAL CASE NOS. 277-93, 279-93, 280-
93, 343-93, 365-93, AND 371-93. 4
Gavino Asiman testified that a certain Jose Percival Borja who was a friend of his relative informed him that a job
recruiter would be at Borja's house at Capt. Villareal St., Cavite City, in case anyone was interested in an overseas
job in Taiwan. Asiman further recalled that on 18 August 1993, he and his friend, Librado Pozas went to Borja's
house where they met the accused-appellant who told them he could get them jobs as factory workers in Taiwan
with a monthly salary of P20,000.00. Accused-appellant required them to submit their passport, bio-data and their
high school diploma as well as to pay P15,00000 each for placement and processing fees. The former issued two
(2) receipts which he signed in the presence of Asiman and Pozas. 5 Accused-appellant assured them that they
could leave for Taiwan twelve (12) days later. Asiman stated that they filed the complaints for illegal recruitment
when they learned that accused-appellant was arrested for illegal recruitment activities.
Librado Pozas corroborated the testimony of Asiman. He added that Borja had no participation in the offense as his
house was merely used as a meeting place by accused-appellant.
Neil Mascardo testified that he met accused-appellant through a friend and also through Jose Borja. Mascardo
narrated that on 7 July 1993, he went to Borja's house to meet accused-appellant who assured him of getting him
an employment in Taiwan at the Rainbow Ship Co., a marble and handicraft factory with a monthly salary of
P20,000.00. He further testified that he paid P15,000.00 to accused-appellant for placement and processing fees as
shown by a receipt signed by accused-appellant. 6 Accused-appellant first told him he could leave on 15 July 1993.
When he later inquired about his departure date, accused-appellant told him he could leave by the end of July 1993.
After July, accused-appellant told him he would leave on 15 August 1993 together with his uncle Manuel Latina.
When he failed to leave on the last mentioned date and accused-appellant told him he would leave on 28 August
1993, Mascardo told accused-appellant he wanted his money back. Accused-appellant told him that a refund was
not possible since he had already sent the money to his brother-in-law in Taiwan Mascardo decided to file a
complaint for illegal recruitment on 28 August 1993 On 31 August 1993, he, Manuel Latina and Ernesto Orcullo went
to the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) where they found out that accused-appellant was
not a licensed or authorized overseas recruiter.
Ricardo Grepo testified that on 11 August 1993, he went to Borja's house where he met with accused-appellant who
received from him P15,000.00 for placement and processing fees. Accused-appellant told him he could get a job as
a factory worker in Taiwan with a monthly salary of P20,000.00 Accused-appellant gave him a signed typewritten
receipt 7 and assured him he could leave for Taiwan on 28 August 1993. Accused-appellant later told him that his
visa was not yet ready and he thereafter learned from Jose Borja that accused-appellant had been arrested for
illegal recruitment activities. Grepo filed his complaint on 30 August 1993.
Lucita Mascardo-Orcullo testified that she is the wife of Ernesto Orcullo, one of the complainants. She stated that on
7 June 1993, she went with her husband to Borja's house where they gave Ernesto's passport and other papers to
accused-appellant who assured them that Ernesto could get a job as a factory worker in Taiwan. Lucita further
averred that they paid P15,000.00 to accused-appellant for placement and processing fees as shown by a receipt
signed by accused-appellant. 8
Dionisa Latina testified that she is the wife of complainant Manuel Latina. She stated that on 9 June 1993, she and
her husband went to Borja's house to meet accused-appellant who told them that Manuel could get a job at a toy
factory in Taiwan. They paid P15,000.00 to accused-appellant who issued a receipt 9 and assured them Manuel
could leave on 30 June 1993. After said date, accused-appellant kept on promising them that Manuel would be able
to leave for Taiwan. The promises were never fulfilled.
Angelina de Luna, a Senior Labor Employment Officer of the POEA, testified that their office received a subpoena
from the trial court requiring the issuance of a certification stating whether or not Tan Tiong Meng alias Tommy Tan
was authorized by the POEA to recruit workers for overseas employment. De Luna presented a certification signed
by Ma. Salome S. Mendoza, Chief, Licensing Branch of the POEA dated 7 July 1994 stating that accused-appellant
is neither licensed nor authorized by the POEA to recruit workers for overseas employment. 10
Accused-appellant Tan Tiong Meng alias Tommy Tan was the only witness for the defense. He testified that he is a
Singaporean national married to Estelita Oribiana, a Filipino-Chinese. He added that he works as a sales
https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1997/apr1997/gr_120835_1997.html 2/4
9/3/2019 G.R. No. 120835-40
representative for Oribiana Laboratory Supplies, a company owned by his brother-in-law which sells laboratory
equipment to various schools in Cavite.
Tan alleged that Jose Percival Borja was introduced to him by a certain Malou Lorenzo at the office of their
laboratory supplies in Sta. Cruz, Manila Lorenzo allegedly told him that Borja needed his help in processing job
applications for abroad. When he talked to Borja, the latter told him that he could help in convincing applicants that
they could work in Taiwan. Borja offered him a P1,000.00 commission from the amount paid by each applicant.
Tan admitted having received money from all the complainants but he said that all the money was turned over to
Borja after deducting his commission. Tan likewise admitted that he and his wife are respondents in about seventy
(70) cases of estafa and illegal recruitment but that it was Lorenzo who was the main recruiter.
The prosecution presented Jose Percival Borja as a rebuttal witness. Borja testified that Tan was introduced to him
by Malou Lorenzo. Accused-appellant told him that they were direct recruiters for jobs in Taiwan and that he has
relatives there. Tan's offer was attractive considering that he charged only P15,000.00 while the prevailing rate for
job placements was P45,000.00-P60,000.00. Borja added that he even told his friends and relatives to apply with
accused-appellant. Tan had told him that he sometimes comes to Cavite to deliver laboratory equipment. When Tan
called him up to tell him he was in the area, Borja told him to come to his house. It was at his house where Tan
accepted money from several job applicants most of whom he (Borja) did not know. When Borja realized that Tan
had cheated the applicants, he helped set up a trap and had Tan arrested by his neighbor Tony Guinto, a Cavite City
policeman. Borja later learned that Tan had victimized several people in Batangas and Metro Manila.
In the present appeal, accused-appellant would have the Court believe that he merely acted as a collector of money
for the principal recruiter Borja who made the representations that he (Tan) could give the applicants jobs in Taiwan.
He maintains that he merely received commissions from the transactions and that the deceit was employed not by
him but by Borja who introduced him as a job recruiter.
Several revealing circumstances belie the version for the defense, namely
1. Neil Mascardo testified that accused-appellant told him he could no longer return his money because he had
already sent it to his brother-in-law Lee Shut Kua in Taiwan;
3. Tan admitted that he and his wife are respondents in about seventy (70) cases for estafa and illegal recruitment in
Batangas; 11
4. Tan executed a sworn statement dated 13 September 1993 before SP02 Eduardo G. Nover, Jr. in the presence of
his lawyer Atty. Florendo C. Medina wherein he admitted receiving P15,000.00 from Gavino Asiman; 12
5. The complainants all pointed to Tan and not Borja as the one who had represented to them that he could give
them jobs in Taiwan.
There is no showing that any of the complainants had ill-motives against Tan other than to bring him to the bar of
justice. The testimonies of the witnesses for the prosecution were straight-forward, credible and convincing. The
constitutional presumption of innocence in Tan's favor has been overcome by proof beyond reasonable doubt and
we affirm his convictions.
(A)ny act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring or procuring workers, and
includes referrals, contract services, promising or advertising for employment, locally or abroad,
whether for profit or not; Provided, that any person or entity which, in any manner, offers or promises
for a fee employment to two or more persons shall be deemed engaged in recruitment and placement.
13
It is clear that accused-appellant's acts of accepting placement fees from job applicants and representing to said
applicants that he could get them jobs in Taiwan constitute recruitment and placement under the above provision of
the Labor Code.
The Labor Code prohibits any person or entity, not authorized by the POEA, from engaging in recruitment and
placement activities thus:
(a) Any recruitment activities, including the prohibited practices enumerated under Article 34 of this
Code, to be undertaken by non-licensees or non-holders of authority shall be deemed illegal and
punishable under Article 39 of this Code . . . .
(b) Illegal recruitment when committed by a syndicate or in large scale shall be considered an offense
involving economic sabotage and shall be penalized in accordance with Article 39 hereof.
Illegal recruitment is deemed committed by a syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3) or more
persons conspiring and/or confederating with one another in carrying out any unlawful or illegal
transaction, enterprise or scheme defined under the first paragraph hereof. Illegal recruitment is
deemed committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more persons individually or as a
group. 14
The POEA having certified that accused-appellant is not authorized to recruit workers for overseas employment, it is
clear that the offense committed against the six (6) complainants in this case is illegal recruitment in large scale
punishable under Article 39 (a) of the Labor Code with life imprisonment and a fine of One Hundred Thousand
Pesos (P100,000.00).
Accused-appellant's guilt of six (6) separate crimes of estafa has likewise been proven
The argument that the deceit was employed by Jose Percival Borja and not by accused-appellant is specious, even
ridiculous. All the complainants agreed that it was accused-appellant Tan who assured them of jobs in Taiwan. The
assurances were made intentionally to deceive the would-be job applicants to part with their money.
In People v. Calonzo, 15 the Court reiterated the rule that a person convicted for illegal recruitment under the Labor
Code can be convicted for violation of the Revised Penal Code provisions on estafa provided the elements of the
crime are present. In People v. Romero 16 the elements of the crime were stated thus:
a) that the accused defrauded another by abuse of confidence or by means of deceit, and
b) that damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended party or third person.
One final point. The names of a certain Malou Lorenzo and Chit Paulino have been mentioned by accused-appellant
as being illegal recruiters whom he contends are either the main recruiters or their agents. It also appears that
https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1997/apr1997/gr_120835_1997.html 3/4
9/3/2019 G.R. No. 120835-40
accused-appellant's wife Estelita Oribiana who is a co-accused in the other illegal recruitment complaints may be a
part of a large syndicate operating in Batangas, Cavite and Metro Manila. There is nothing on the record to show
that attempts were made to investigate these three (3) people
The campaign and drive against illegal recruiters should be continuous and unrelenting. Government should not be
content with bringing to justice but a number of these diabolic denizens of society who thrive on the dreams of our
countrymen of having a better life. Only when the last of their tribe has been convicted and punished can the
government rightfully claim that it has fulfilled the constitutional mandate to protect the rights and promote the
welfare of workers. 17
WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from finding accused-appellant Tan Tiong Meng alias "Tommy Tan" guilty of
illegal recruitment in large scale and six (6) counts of estafa, is hereby AFFIRMED. Costs against accused-
appellant.
SO ORDERED.
Footnotes
1 Rollo, p. 10.
2 Rollo, p. 14.
4 Rollo, p. 51.
13 Article 13(b).
https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1997/apr1997/gr_120835_1997.html 4/4