Qualified Theft and Estafa

In particular, estafa through misappropriation is defined and penalized under Article 315, paragraph 1(b) of the RPC, as
amended by Republic Act No. 10951,[26N ACT ADJUSTING THE AMOUNT OR THE VALUE OF PROPERTY AND DAMAGE ON WHICH A PENALTY IS BASED AND THE FINES IMPOSED UNDER
THE REVISED PENAL CODE, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ACT NO. 3815, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE "REVISED PENAL CODE", AS AMENDED. Approved August 29, 2017 ]
. which provides:
Section 85. Article 315 of the same Act, as amended by Republic Act No. 4885, Presidential Decree No. 1689, and Presidential
Decree No. 818, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
ART. 315. Swindling (estafa). – Any person who shall defraud another by any of the means mentioned hereinbelow shall be
punished by:
1st. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period, if the amount of the
fraud is over Two million four hundred thousand pesos (P2,400,000) but does not exceed Four million four hundred thousand
pesos (P4,400,000), and if such amount exceeds the latter sum, the penalty provided in this paragraph shall be imposed in its
maximum period, adding one year for each additional Two million pesos (P2,000,000); but the total penalty which may be
imposed shall not exceed twenty years. In such cases, and in connection with the accessory penalties which may be imposed
and for the purpose of the other provisions of this Code, the penalty shall be termed prision mayor or reclusion temporal, as the
case may be.
xxxx
1. With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence, namely: x x x x
(b) By misappropriating or converting, to the prejudice of another, money, goods or any other personal property received by
the offender in trust, or on commission, or for administration, or under any other obligation involving the duty to make
delivery of or to return the same, even though such obligation be totally or partially guaranteed by a bond; or by denying
having received such money, goods, or other property[.]
The elements of estafa through misappropriation under Article 315, paragraph 1(b) are: (a) the offender's receipt of money,
goods, or other personal property in trust, or on commission, or for administration, or under any other obligation involving
the duty to deliver, or to return, the same; (b) misappropriation or conversion by the offender of the money or property
received, or denial of receipt of the money or property; (c) the misappropriation, conversion or denial is to the prejudice of
another; and (d) demand by the offended party that the offender return the money or property received. [27Serona v. Court of Appeals, 440
Phil. 508, 517 (2002)]
In Tria v. People,[34 743 Phil. 441 (2014)] We defined the second element of conversion or misappropriation as follows:
The words "convert" and "misappropriate"; connote the act of using or disposing of another's property as if it were one's own,
or of devoting it to a purpose or use different from that agreed upon. To misappropriate for one's own use includes not only
conversion to one's personal advantage, but also every attempt to dispose of the property of another without right. In proving
the element of conversion or misappropriation, a legal presumption of misappropriation arises when the accused fails to
deliver the proceeds of the sale or to return the items to be sold and fails to give an account of their whereabouts. [35] Id. at 452]
Qualified Theft and Estafa
Both qualified theft and estafa may be committed by abuse of confidence. However, it will be easier to determine whether the
crime is qualified theft or estafa once it is settled if the possession is merely material or juridical. If it is only material
possession and there was misappropriation, then the crime committed is qualified theft. If there was juridical possession and
it was misappropriated or converted, then the crime committed is estafa.
Where only the material possession is transferred, conversion of the property gives rise to the crime of theft; where both
material and juridical possession are transferred, misappropriation of the property would constitute estafa; and, where in
addition to the material and juridical possession, the ownership of the property is transferred, misappropriation would only
give rise to a civil obligation. (People vs Aquino, [CA] 36 O.G. 1886)

Qualified Theft and Estafa

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Qualified Theft and Estafa

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

In particular, estafa through misappropriation is defined and penalized under Article 315, paragraph 1(b) of the RPC, as

1. With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence, namely: x x x x

Qualified Theft and Estafa

You might also like