Republic of the Philippines

Department of Justice
NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
Tacloban City Prosecutors Office
Justice Hall, Magsaysay Blvd., Tacloban City
SPOUSES Y
Complainants,

IS NO.: 14343
FOR: Violation of B.P. Blg. 22

and
ESTAFA
-versusM,
Respondent
x------------------------------------------x

COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT
DEFENDANT, by the undersigned attorney and to this Honorable Office respectfully
avers that:
1. Defendant admits paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 with regards the names,
residences and status of the parties, but refutes portions of other paragraphs,
for lack of adequate knowledge to form as to the truth thereof.
2. Defendant denies particularly paragraph ten (10), claiming that the
defendant after notice of the dishonored check practically abandoned to fund
it. Defendant, through the internet replied dated February 12, 2010 stating
that she was not able to fund the said check due to the series of losses
suffered by her business. As a substitute, defendant will issue another check
for the payment of the said commodities. Moreover, the defendant secured
an offering of twenty thousand pesos (P20, 000.00) as a fractional payment
for the commodities that were received last January of 2010 but the latter
denied the same. Photocopy of said reply letter attached as ANNEX- E.
3. Defendant rejects also the contention of the plaintiff that she employed
deceit in the issuance of a dishonored check. In the case of People of the
Philippines vs. Lea Sagan Juliano, the Supreme Court held that in failing to
prove the element of deceit by appellant, that prosecution failed to prove
beyond reasonable doubt that appellant is guilty of Estafa under Article 315,

1 | Page

paragraph 2 (d), of the Revised Penal Code. With that, the appellant did not
constitute fraudulent acts that caused damages to the complainant.
4. Defendant also denies paragraph thirteen (13) stating that the existence and
amount of the interest. The agreement was not put into writing rather making
it only a verbal agreement.

WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully prays that the complaint be dismissed

due to lack of merit, with costs against the plaintiff.

Tacloban City, December 8, 2010

ATTY. GAUDENCIO A. CATUBAO JR.

Counsel for the Defendant
140-B Real Street, Tacloban City
PTR NO. 7484788/02/04
IBP OR# 143478 /11/03/09
Attys. Roll No. 62455/ May 10, 2009
MCLE COMPLIANCE NUMBER III-4874 /11/7/2009
Contact No. 327-1990
Email: gcatubao@yahoo.com

2 | Page

VERIFICATION

Defendant, of legal age, after having duly sworn, deposes and says:

1. That she has caused in the preparation of the foregoing answer with
defenses, and the allegations therein are true and correct of his personal
knowledge and/or based on the reliable records.
2. That she further states that the interest was made in oral and no written
agreement was furnished between them.
Executed this 8th day of December, 2010 at Tacloban City

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this December 8, 2010 in Tacloban

City, Republic of the Philippines, affiant being personally known to me, and I certify
that I have personally examined the affiant and I am fully contented that she
willfully and spontaneously executed her affidavit and fully understood all contents
thereof.

Doc No.: 48
Page No.: 44
Book No.: Y
Series of 2010

3 | Page

ANNEX E

January 20, 2010

SPOUSES Y
69 Imelda Veteranos Extension
Tacloban City

Dear Sir and Madame:

I act contrite for the dishonor of said checks due to insufficient funds and
instability of my business. I am willing to issue another check for the said
commodities amounting to one hundred twenty-six thousand, four hundred ninety
pesos (P126, 490.00) during these days.

Truly yours,
M

4 | Page