THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 255396. November 24, 2021.]
BETTY G. UY, petitioner,vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and VICENTE O. CHUA, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated November 24, 2021, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 255396 (Betty G. Uy v. People of the Philippines and Vicente O. Chua). — This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari 1 under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court (Rules) assailing the Decision 2 dated July 24, 2018 and the Resolution 3 dated January 19, 2021 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 120135. The Decision and the Resolution upheld the conviction of petitioner Betty G. Uy (Uy) for 46 counts of violation of Batas Pambansa Bilang (B.P.) 22, otherwise known as the "Bouncing Checks Law."
Facts of the Case
Uy obtained a loan from respondent Vicente O. Chua (Chua) in the amount of P776,896.00. As security for the loan, Uy issued 46 checks with differing amounts in favor of Chua. The 46 checks were dishonored upon presentment because the bank account from which the checks were drawn was closed. Since Chua's demand to make good the checks were unaddressed due to Uy's financial problems, Chua filed complaints for violation of B.P. 22. 46 separate Informations corresponding to each dishonored check were filed against Uy. 4
Uy averred that she merely issued the checks as security for her loan obligation with Chua. There was only one loan extended by Chua to Uy — a P450,000.00 loan secured by nine checks dated between November 4, 1999 to December 29, 1999. Uy subsequently sought to restructure her loan obligation when her debt was reduced to P250,000.00. As a result of the debt restructuring agreement. Uy issued another 37 checks in smaller, varied denominations. Uy declared that she overpaid her obligation using 219 5 cleared checks issued by her, her husband, and her daughter since their total payments amounted to P1,337,270.00. 6
Ruling of the Metropolitan Trial Court
In a Decision dated September 27, 2010, the MeTC found Uy guilty of violating B.P. 22. The MeTC imposed: (1) a fine of P50,000.00 with subsidiary imprisonment for Criminal Case No. 414767-CR; (2) a straight penalty of two months imprisonment for nine criminal cases; and (3) a straight penalty of 30 days imprisonment for 36 criminal cases. Uy was also ordered to indemnify Chua the amount of P668,396.00 (computed by deducting the check payments made by Uy's daughter and husband totaling P108,500.00 to Uy's loan obligation of P776,896.00) with 12% annual interest and to pay P20,000.00 in attorney's fees. 7
The first-level court found the elements of B.P. 22 present, i.e., (1) the making, drawing, and issuance of any check to apply for account or for value; (2) the knowledge of the maker, drawer, or issuer that at the time of issuance he or she does not have sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank for the payment of the check in full upon its presentment; and (3) the subsequent dishonor of the check by the drawee bank for insufficiency of funds or credit or dishonor for the same reason had not the drawer, without any valid cause, ordered the bank to stop payment. 8
Dissatisfied with the unfavorable decision, Uy appealed the MeTC's decision with the RTC. CAIHTE
Ruling of the Regional Trial Court
In a Decision dated May 3, 2011, the RTC affirmed the MeTC's decision with modification as to the penalty. The RTC revised the penalties from straight penalties of imprisonment to fines ranging from P535.00-P50,000.00, depending on the value of the dishonored checks. The RTC maintained the MeTC's imposition of civil liability, the dispositive portion of which reads:
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, assailed Decision dated September 27, 2010 is hereby MODIFIED by instead imposing in each case the penalty of fine equivalent to the value of the subject check as follow[s], to[] wit:
(1) In Criminal Case No. 414767-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P25,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(2) In Criminal Case No. 414758-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(3) In Criminal Case No. 414759-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(4) In Criminal Case No. 414768-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P9,493.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(5) In Criminal Case No. 414769-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P1,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(6) In Criminal Case No. 414760-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(7) In Criminal Case No. 414761-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case insolvency or refusal to pay;
(8) In Criminal Case No. 414770-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P625.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case insolvency or refusal to pay;
(9) In Criminal Case No. 414771-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P625.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(10) In Criminal Case No. 414762-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(11) In Criminal Case No. 414763-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(12) In Criminal Case No. 414772-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P25,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(13) In Criminal Case No. 414773-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P1,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(14) In Criminal Case No. 414764-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(15) In Criminal Case No. 414765-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(16) In Criminal Case No. 414774-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P625.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(17) In Criminal Case No. 414775-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P535.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(18) In Criminal Case No. 414766-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(19) In Criminal Case No. 414787-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P1,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(20) In Criminal Case No. 414786-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(21) In Criminal Case No. 414785-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P625.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(22) In Criminal Case No. 414775-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(23) In Criminal Case No. 414783-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P625.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(24) In Criminal Case No. 414782-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(25) In Criminal Case No. 414781-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(26) In Criminal Case No. 414780-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(27) In Criminal Case No. 414779-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(28) In Criminal Case No. 414778-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(29) In Criminal Case No. 414777-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(30) In Criminal Case No. 414776-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(31) In Criminal Case No. 414778-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P4,746.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(32) In Criminal Case No. 414789-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P4,747.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(33) In Criminal Case No. 414790-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P6,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(34) In Criminal Case No. 414791-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P6,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(35) In Criminal Case No. 414792-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P6,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(36) In Criminal Case No. 414793-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P6,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(37) In Criminal Case No. 414794-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(38) In Criminal Case No. 414795-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(39) In Criminal Case No. 414796-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(40) In Criminal Case No. 414797-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(41) In Criminal Case No. 414798-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(42) In Criminal Case No. 414799-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(43) In Criminal Case No. 414800-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(44) In Criminal Case No. 414801-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(45) In Criminal Case No. 414802-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
(46) In Criminal Case No. 414803-CR, Betty Uy is ordered to pay FINE of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
Betty Uy is ordered to INDEMNIFY Vicente Chua in the amount of P668,396.00 with 12 percent (12%) interest per annum, from the filing of the Informations until the amount due is finally paid. She is also ordered to pay P20,000 as attorney[']s fees.
SO ORDERED. 9 (Emphasis in the original)
Undeterred, petitioner filed a Petition for Review under Rule 42 with the CA.
Ruling of the Court of Appeals
In its Decision 10 dated July 24, 2018, the CA dismissed the petition and affirmed the RTC's findings. 11
The CA delved into the procedural issue raised by Uy — particularly, that Uy's right to due process was not violated when the RTC resolved her pending motion for reconsideration prior to the RTC's receipt of her Reply to respondent's Comment. Uy's right to due process only provides for an opportunity to be heard, which she was amply given. The Reply was not a condition precedent before resolving the motion for reconsideration. 12
The CA adopted the MeTC's and the RTC's decisions, which discredited Uy's allegation of overpayment for being illogical and a mere afterthought. The appellate court observed that such allegation was never mentioned in Uy's Counter Affidavit or Supplemental Counter Affidavit, which pleadings she adopted during trial. The CA emphasized the contradiction in Uy's claim of financial distress vis-à-vis her alleged overpayment of the original debt (by thrice its amount). Neither did the CA find any logic in asking for a restructuring agreement after allegedly paying the loan in full. The fact that Chua was still in possession of the 46 checks goes against Uy's claim that the said 46 checks were merely issued as security for a debt she vehemently averred to have fully paid. Lastly, payment to a bank account under the name of a certain Evelyn Go Que Chua — married to a Vicente O. Chua — did not necessarily mean that the payments were made to respondent Chua. 13
The CA quoted, "only full payment of the face value of the subject checks at the time of its presentment or during the five-day grace period could have exonerated [Uy] from criminal liability." 14 Any payments made after the 5-day grace period would only exonerate the accused from civil liability to the extent of the amount paid. 15
Thus, Uy filed the instant Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules.
Petitioner's arguments
Uy's main argument relies on the alleged overpayment she made to Chua. Uy insisted that her proof of overpayment exonerates her from any criminal and civil liability. While Uy admitted that the 46 checks were dishonored, she maintained that the cleared checks issued by her, her husband, and her daughter in the amount of P1,337,270.00 were to satisfy the loan obligation secured by the 46 dishonored checks. Uy also accused the CA of gravely abusing its discretion in treating the checks issued by her husband and her daughter as a deduction to Uy's civil liability but not the 83 cleared checks she issued. 16
Ruling of the Court
The instant petition for review on certiorari failed to comply with Section 4 (d), Rule 45 of the Rules. The petition did not include a "clearly legible duplicate original, or a certified true copy of the judgment or final order or resolution certified by the clerk of court of the court a quo and x x x such material portions of the record as would support the petition." Particularly, the petition only attached an incomplete 17 photocopy of the certified true copy of the CA's Decision dated July 24, 2018. The MeTC and RTC decisions, which Uy also assailed, were not appended to her petition. Even on this ground alone, the petition becomes dismissible following Section 5, Rule 45 of the Rules.
Moreover, the instant petition calls for a re-evaluation of the evidence presented before the lower courts. A petition for review on certiorari is only limited to resolving questions of law, in the absence of any exception to this general rule. In the present case, none of the exceptions apply. This Court has consistently held that a trial court's findings of fact, when affirmed by the CA, are binding upon this Court. 18 The same rule applies here.
In any case, it has been established that "[g]enerally only the full payment of the value of the dishonored check during the five-day grace period would exculpate the accused from criminal liability under B.P. Blg. 22." 19 This rule holds true even if the checks were issued as a security to a loan and were not meant to be encashed. The purpose of B.P. 22 is to punish the act of issuing a worthless check. 20 While this Court has acquitted those who fully paid the obligation prior to the receipt of the mandatory written demand, the instant case is not on the same ground as those exceptional cases.
In Macalalag v. People, 21 the accused was acquitted in one of the two criminal cases filed against her because the previous payment of P156,000.00 covered more than the P100,000.00 face value of the first check. In Griffith v. Court of Appeals, 22 the accused was exonerated of criminal liability since the monetary obligation was fully paid (with P1,000,000.00 to spare) via an auction sale conducted more than two years before the Informations were filed against him. The properties foreclosed and sold by the private complainant in that case were already in the custody of the private complainant even before the checks were presented for payment. In Tan v. Philippine Commercial International Bank, 23 the judgment of conviction was reversed because the accused returned to the creditor buses worth P6,600,000.00 prior to the transmittal and receipt of a demand letter, which sought to claim only P1,785,855.75. Here, there is no proof that the 83 cleared checks issued by Uy amounting to P1,228,770.00 were for the payment of her P776,896.00 loan to Chua. Uy did not mention any finding by the MeTC or RTC that substantiates her claim. On the contrary, the CA quoted either the MeTC or RTC's decision where the latter discredited Uy's allegation (that her 83 cleared checks were for the payment of her obligation covered by the 46 dishonored checks). DETACa
The lower courts correctly disregarded her 83 cleared checks. They correctly reduced Uy's civil obligation only by the amounts paid by Uy's husband and daughter as the checks issued by the latter were made after the 46 checks subject of the criminal case were dishonored. Again, Uy's 83 checks were cleared prior to the dishonor of the 46 bad checks without any proof that these were categorically for the payment of her loan obligation secured by the 46 dishonored checks. Thus, the MeTC, RTC, and CA properly imposed a reduced civil liability with legal interest. However, the rate of legal interest must be modified in accordance with Nacar v. Gallery Frames. 24 Following Nacar, a 12% legal interest rate shall be imposed from the time of filing the information until June 30, 2013 and a lower legal interest rate of 6% will be imposed thereafter from July 1, 2013 until the award is fully paid.
Lastly, We find no error in the RTC's modification of Uy's penalty from imprisonment to a fine in each of the 46 counts. This policy was encouraged in Vaca v Court of Appeals25 and echoed in Administrative Circular No. 12-2000 dated November 21, 2000. This Court clarified that the Judge has the discretion to determine whether the imposition of a fine would be more appropriate given the circumstances. 26 The imposed fines, amounting to P776,896.00, were equivalent to the total face value of the 46 checks issued. This complies with the requirement under B.P. 22 that the required fine be "not less than[,] but not more than double[,] the amount of the check, which fine shall in no case exceed Two Hundred Thousand Pesos." 27 Thus, the fines imposed by the RTC, as affirmed by the CA, remains.
WHEREFORE, the Petition for Review on Certiorari is DENIED. The Decision dated July 24, 2018 and the Resolution dated January 19, 2021 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 120135 are AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION in that:
1. In Criminal Case No. 414767-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P25,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
2. In Criminal Case No. 414758-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
3. In Criminal Case No. 414759-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
4. In Criminal Case No. 414768-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P9,493.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
5. In Criminal Case No. 414769-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P1,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
6. In Criminal Case No. 414760-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
7. In Criminal Case No. 414761-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
8. In Criminal Case No. 414770-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P625.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
9. In Criminal Case No. 414771-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P625.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
10. In Criminal Case No. 414762-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay fine of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
11. In Criminal Case No. 414763-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
12. In Criminal Case No. 414772-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P25,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
13. In Criminal Case No. 414773-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P1,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
14. In Criminal Case No. 414764-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
15. In Criminal Case No. 414765-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
16. In Criminal Case No. 414774-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P625.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
17. In Criminal Case No. 414775-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P535.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
18. In Criminal Case No. 414766-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
19. In Criminal Case No. 414787-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P1,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
20. In Criminal Case No. 414786-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
21. In Criminal Case No. 414785-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P625.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
22. In Criminal Case No. 414775-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
23. In Criminal Case No. 414783-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P625.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
24. In Criminal Case No. 414782-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
25. In Criminal Case No. 414781-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay fine of P500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
26. In Criminal Case No. 414780-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
27. In Criminal Case No. 414779-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
28. In Criminal Case No. 414778-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
29. In Criminal Case No. 414777-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
30. In Criminal Case No. 414776-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
31. In Criminal Case No. 414778-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P4,746.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
32. In Criminal Case No. 414789-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P4,747.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
33. In Criminal Case No. 414790-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P6,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
34. In Criminal Case No. 414791-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P6,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
35. In Criminal Case No. 414792-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P6,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
36. In Criminal Case No. 414793-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P6,250.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
37. In Criminal Case No. 414794-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
38. In Criminal Case No. 414795-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
39. In Criminal Case No. 414796-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
40. In Criminal Case No. 414797-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
41. In Criminal Case No. 414798-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
42. In Criminal Case No. 414799-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
43. In Criminal Case No. 414800-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
44. In Criminal Case No. 414801-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
45. In Criminal Case No. 414802-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay;
46. In Criminal Case No. 414803-CR, Betty Uy is ORDERED to pay a fine of P12,500.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency or refusal to pay.
Petitioner Betty G. Uy is ORDERED to indemnify respondent Vicente O. Chua in the amount of P668,396.00 with annual legal interest of twelve percent (12%) per annum, from the filing of the Informations until June 30, 2013 and annual legal interest of six percent (6%) per annum from July 1, 2013 until the amount due is finally paid. Petitioner Betty G. Uy is also ORDERED to pay P20,000.00 as attorney's fees. HEITAD
SO ORDERED."(Inting, J., designated as additional Member of the Third Division;Rosario, J., no part.)
By authority of the Court:
(SGD.) MISAEL DOMINGO C. BATTUNG IIIDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Rollo, pp. 8-46.
2. Penned by Associate Justice Eduardo B. Peralta, Jr., with the concurrence of Associate Justices Ricardo R. Rosario (now a Member of this Court) and Ronaldo Roberto B. Martin; id. at 50-58.
3. Penned by Associate Justice Eduardo B. Peralta, Jr., with the concurrence of Associate Justices Fernanda Lampas Peralta and Ronaldo Roberto B. Martin; id. at 60-61.
4. Id. at 51.
5. Two issued by Uy's husband, totaling P1,400.00; 134 issued by Uy's daughter, totaling P107,100.00; and 83 issued by Uy totaling P1,227,770.00.
6. Rollo, pp. 26-34.
7. Id. at 11-17.
8. Sam Mateo v. People, 705 Phil. 630, 636-637 (2013).
9. Rollo, pp. 18-22.
10. Supra note 2.
11. Rollo, p. 58.
12. Id. at 53-54.
13. Id. at 55-57.
14. Id. at 56.
15. Id. at 57-58.
16. Id. at 26-45.
17. Missing page 6 and page 9 are ineligible.
18. Legarda v. People, G.R. No. 249688, June 15, 2020.
19. Lim v. People, 748 Phil. 649, 658 (2014).
20. Sumbilla v. Matrix Finance Corporation, 762 Phil. 130, 143 (2015), citing Lozano v. Hon. Martinez, 230 Phil. 406, 421 (1986).
21. 540 Phil. 410 (2006).
22. 428 Phil. 828 (2002).
23. 575 Phil. 485 (2008).
24. 716 Phil. 267 (2013).
25. 359 Phil. 187 (1998).
26. See Administrative Circular No. 13-2001 dated February 21, 2001.
27. Garcia v. Court of Appeals, 441 Phil. 323 (2002), which clarified the qualification by inserting the proper punctuation marks to emphasize the proper range of the imposable fine from an amount not less than the amount of the check but not more than double the said amount.