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
