In the case of ROSITA SY vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 183879, April 14, 2010, where the sole issue was whether the accused should be held liable for Estafa penalized under Article 315, paragraph 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), the Supreme Court held that:
(a) There are three ways of committing estafa, viz.:
· With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence;
· By means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts; or
· Through fraudulent means.
(b) The ways of committing estafa may be reduced to two, i.e.,
· By means of abuse of confidence; or
· By means of deceit.
(c) The elements of estafa in general are the following:
· That an accused defrauded another by abuse of confidence, or by means of deceit; and
· That damage and prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused the offended party or third person.
(d) The act complained penalized by Article 315, paragraph 2(a) of the RPC is estafa committed by any person who shall “defraud another by false pretenses or fraudulent acts executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud”.
It is committed by “using fictitious name, or by pretending to possess power, influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions, or by means of other similar deceits”.
(e) The elements of estafa by means of deceit are the following, viz.:
· That there must be a false pretense or fraudulent representation as to his power, influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions;
· That such false pretense or fraudulent representation was made or executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud;
· That the offended party relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent means and was induced to part with his money or property; and