Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
Same; Same; The range of permutation is not left to the pleaders liking, but is dependent
on the surrounding nature of the allegations which may warrant that a verification be based
purely on personal knowledge, or entirely on authentic records or on both sources.The range
of permutation is not left to the pleaders liking, but is dependent on the surrounding nature
of the allegations which may warrant that a verification be based either purely on personal
knowledge, or entirely on authentic records, or on both sources.
* SECOND DIVISION.
503
Remedial Law; Demurrer to Evidence; When a demurrer to evidence is filed without leave
of court, the whole case is submitted for judgment on the basis of the evidence for the
prosecution as the accused is deemed to have waived the right to present evidence.When a
demurrer to evidence is filed without leave of court, the whole case is submitted for judgment
on the basis of the evidence for the prosecution as the accused is deemed to have waived the
right to present evidence. At that juncture, the court is called upon to decide the case
including its civil aspect, unless the enforcement of the civil liability by a separate civil action
has been waived or reserved.
Criminal Procedure; Actions; If the filing of a separate civil action has not been reserved
or priorly instituted or the enforcement of civil liability is not waived, the trial court should,
in case of conviction, state the civil liability or damages caused by the wrongful act or omission
to be recovered from the accused by the offended party, if there is any.If the filing of a
separate civil action has not been reserved or priorly instituted or the enforcement of civil
liability is not waived, the trial court should, in case of conviction, state the civil liability or
damages caused by the wrongful act or omission to be recovered from the accused by the
offended party, if there is any.
Jurisdictions; Where a court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the person
of the accused, and the crime was committed within its territorial jurisdiction, the court
necessarily exercises jurisdiction over all issues that the law requires it to resolve.Where
504
CARPIO-MORALES, J.:
Petitioner, Hun Hyung Park, assails the Court of Appeals (CA) Resolutions dated
May 20, 2004 and September 28, 2004 in CA-G.R. CR No. 28344 dismissing his
1 2
charged for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, otherwise known as the Bouncing
Checks Law, for issuing on June 28, 1999 Philippine National Bank Check No.
0077133 postdated August 28, 1999 in the amount of P1,875,000 which was
dishonored for having been drawn against insufficient funds.
Upon arraignment, respondent, with the assistance of counsel, pleaded not guilty
to the offense charged. Following the pre-trial conference, the prosecution presented
its evidence-in-chief.
_______________
1 CA Rollo, pp. 113-114, penned by Justice Mariano C. Del Castillo, with the concurrence of Justice
Marina L. Buzon and Justice Noel G. Tijam.
2 Id., at pp. 172-173, penned by Justice Mariano C. Del Castillo, with the concurrence of Justice Marina
L. Buzon and Justice Monina Arevalo-Zearosa.
3 Rollo, p. 86.
505
VOL. 515, FEBRUARY 12, 2007 505
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
After the prosecution rested its case, respondent filed a Motion for Leave of Court to
File Demurrer to Evidence to which he attached his Demurrer, asserting that the
prosecution failed to prove that he received the notice of dishonor, hence, the
presumption of the element of knowledge of insufficiency of funds did not arise. 4
By Order of February 27, 2003, the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Makati,
5
Branch 65 granted the Demurrer and dismissed the case. The prosecutions Motion
for Reconsideration was denied. 6
Petitioner appealed the civil aspect of the case to the Regional Trial Court (RTC)
7
of Makati, contending that the dismissal of the criminal case should not include its
civil aspect.
By Decision of September 11, 2003, Branch 60 of the RTC held that while the
evidence presented was insufficient to prove respondents criminal liability, it did not
altogether extinguish his civil liability. It accordingly granted the appeal of petitioner
and ordered respondent to pay him the amount of P1,875,000 with legal interest. 8
Upon respondents motion for reconsideration, however, the RTC set aside its
decision and ordered the remand of the case to the MeTC for further proceedings, so
that the defendant [respondent herein] may adduce evidence on the civil aspect of the
case. Petitioners motion for reconsideration of the remand of the case having been
9
4 Records, pp. 234-244, citing Ting v. Court of Appeals, 398 Phil. 481;344 SCRA 551 (2000).
5 Rollo, p. 245.
6 Id., at p. 87.
7 Docketed as Criminal Case No. 03-1836. Petitioner amended the Notice of Appeal on June 2, 2003,
after the case had already been docketed, to point out that he is appealing the order of dismissal only insofar
as the civil aspect of the case is concerned (vide Records, pp. 283, 288, 290, 422).
8 Rollo, pp. 113-117.
9 Id., at pp. 143-146.
506
506 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
the CA which, by the assailed resolutions, dismissed his petition for the following
reasons:
In his present petition, petitioner assails the above-stated reasons of the appellate
court in dismissing his petition.
The manner of verification for pleadings which are required to be verified, such as
a petition for review before the CA of an appellate judgment of the RTC, is prescribed 11
_______________
507
VOL. 515, FEBRUARY 12, 2007 507
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
and belief, or lacks a proper verification shall be treated as an unsigned
pleading. (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)
12
both a disjunctive and conjunctive sense, this parallel legal signification avoids a
construction that will exclude the combination of the alternatives or bar the efficacy
of any one of the alternatives standing alone. 15
508
508 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
As pointed out by respondent, authentic records as a basis for verification bear
significance in petitions wherein the greater portions of the allegations are based on
the records of the proceedings in the court of origin and/or the court a quo, and not
solely on the personal knowledge of the petitioner. To illustrate, petitioner himself
could not have affirmed, based on his personal knowledge, the truthfulness of the
statement in his petition before the CA that at the pre-trial conference respondent
16
admitted having received the letter of demand, because he (petitioner) was not
present during the conference. Hence, petitioner needed to rely on the records to
17
assurance that the allegations in the pleading have been made in good faith, or are
true and correct and not merely speculative. 19
This Court has strictly been enforcing the requirement of verification and
certification and enunciating that obedience to the requirements of procedural rules
is needed if fair results are to be expected therefrom. Utter disregard of the rules
cannot just be rationalized by harking on the policy of liberal construction. While the 20
requirement is not jurisdictional in nature, it does not make it less a rule. A relaxed
_______________
16 Rollo, p. 53.
17 Records, p. 69; TSN, August 1, 2001.
18 Vide Grogun, Incorporated v. National Power Corp., 458 Phil. 217, 230-231; 411 SCRA 357, 367 (2003)
for a definition of verification.
19 Clavecilla v. Quitain, G.R. No. 147989, February 20, 2006, 482 SCRA 623, 631.
20 Id., at p. 623.
509
VOL. 515, FEBRUARY 12, 2007 509
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
application of the rule can only be justified by the attending circumstances of the
case. 21
A perusal of the petition filed before the CA shows that the only duplicate original
or certified true copies attached as annexes thereto are the January 14, 2004 RTC
Order granting respondents Motion for Reconsideration and the March 29, 2004 RTC
Order denying petitioners Motion for Reconsid-
_______________
21 Cf. Shipside, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 404 Phil. 981; 352 SCRA 334(2001).
22 RULES OF COURT, Rule 42, Sec. 2 (d).
510
510 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
eration. The copy of the September 11, 2003 RTC Decision, which petitioner prayed
to be reinstated, is not a certified true copy and is not even legible. Petitioner later
recompensed though by appending to his Motion for Reconsideration a duplicate
original copy.
While petitioner averred before the CA in his Motion for Reconsideration that the
February 27, 2003 MeTC Order was already attached to his petition as Annex G,
Annex G bares a replicate copy of a different order, however. It was to this Court
that petitioner belatedly submitted an uncertified true copy of the said MeTC Order
as an annex to his Reply to respondents Comment.
This Court in fact observes that the copy of the other MeTC Order, that dated May
5, 2003, which petitioner attached to his petition before the CA is similarly uncertified
as true.
Since both Orders of the MeTC were adverse to him even with respect to the civil
aspect of the case, petitioner was mandated to submit them in the required form. 23
In fine, petitioner fell short in his compliance with Section 2 (d) of Rule 42,
the mandatory tenor of which is discernible thereunder and is well settled. He has 24
not, however, advanced any strong compelling reasons to warrant a relaxation of the
Rules, hence, his petition before the CA was correctly dismissed.
Procedural rules are tools designed to facilitate the adjudication of cases. Courts and
litigants alike are thus enjoined to abide strictly by the rules. And while the Court, in some
instances, allows a relaxation in the application of the rules, this we stress, was never
_______________
23 Cf. Ramos v. Court of Appeals, 341 Phil. 157; 275 SCRA 167 (1997), which ruled that a petitioner is
not required to attach to the petition before the Court of Appeals a certified true copybut only a true or
plain copyof the MeTC Decision since petitioner is not appealing therefrom as it was rendered in her
favor.
24 Atillo v. Bombay, 404 Phil. 179, 188; 351 SCRA 361, 368 (2001).
511
VOL. 515, FEBRUARY 12, 2007 511
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
intended to forge a bastion for erring litigants to violate the rules with impunity. The liberality
in the interpretation and application of the rules applies only in proper cases and under
justifiable causes and circumstances. While it is true that litigation is not a game of
technicalities, it is equally true that every case must be prosecuted in accordance with the
prescribed procedure to insure an orderly and speedy administration of justice. (Emphasis 25
supplied)
As to the third reason for the appellate courts dismissal of his petitionfailure to
implead the People of the Philippines as a party in the petitionindeed, as petitioner
contends, the same is of no moment, he having appealed only the civil aspect of the
case. Passing on the dual purpose of a criminal action, this Court ruled:
Unless the offended party waives the civil action or reserves the right to institute it
separately or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action, there are two actions
involved in a criminal case. The first is the criminal action for the punishment of the offender.
The parties are the People of the Philippines as the plaintiff and the accused. In a criminal
action, the private complainant is merely a witness for the State on the criminal aspect of the
action. The second is the civil action arising from the delict. The private complainant is the
plaintiff and the accused is the defendant. There is a merger of the trial of the two cases to
avoid multiplicity of suits. (Italics supplied)
26
25 Garbo v. Court of Appeals, 327 Phil. 780, 784; 258 SCRA 159, 163 (1996).
26 Salazar v. People, 458 Phil. 504, 514; 411 SCRA 598, 605 (2003).
27 From the MeTCs order, the Office of the City Prosecutor of Makati instituted a special civil action for
certiorari with the Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 147. Docketed as SCA No. 03-712 entitled
People of the Philippines v. Hon Rommel O. Baybay and Eung Won Choi, the petition was dismissed on
October 28, 2003
512
512 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
executory and the prosecution cannot appeal the acquittal because of the
constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy.
Either the offended party or the accused may, however, appeal the civil aspect of
the judgment despite the acquittal of the accused. The public prosecutor has generally
no interest in appealing the civil aspect of a decision acquitting the accused. The
acquittal ends his work. The case is terminated as far as he is concerned. The real
parties in interest in the civil aspect of a decision are the offended party and the
accused. 28
_______________
for being improper and for lack of merit, which order eventually attained finality (vide Records, pp. 335-
341, 564-565, 676).
28 Cruz v. Court of Appeals, 436 Phil. 641, 653; 388 SCRA 72, 82 (2002).
29 RULES OF COURT, Rule 119, Sec. 23 reads: Demurrer to Evidence.After the prosecution rests its
case, the court may dismiss the action on the ground of insufficiency of evidence (1) on its own initiative
after giving the prosecution the opportunity to be heard or (2) upon demurrer to evidence filed by the accused
with or without leave of court.
If the court denies the demurrer to evidence filed with leave of court, the accused may adduce evidence
in his defense. When the demurrer to evidence is filed without leave of court, the accused waives the right
to present evidence and submits the case for judgment on the basis of the evidence for the prosecution.
The motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence shall specifically state its grounds and shall
be filed within a nonextendible period of five (5) days after the prosecution rests its case. The prosecution
may oppose the motion within a non-extendible period of five (5) days from its receipt.
513
VOL. 515, FEBRUARY 12, 2007 513
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
court is called upon to decide the case including its civil aspect, unless the
enforcement of the civil liability by a separate civil action has been waived or
reserved. 30
If the filing of a separate civil action has not been reserved or priorly instituted or
the enforcement of civil liability is not waived, the trial court should, in case of
conviction, state the civil liability or damages caused by the wrongful act or omission
to be recovered from the accused by the offended party, if there is any. 31
For, in case of acquittal, the accused may still be adjudged civilly liable. The
extinction of the penal action does not carry with it the extinction of the civil action
where (a) the acquittal is based on reasonable doubt as only preponderance of
evidence is required; (b) the court declares that the liability of the accused is only
civil; and (c) the civil liability of the accused does not arise from or is not based upon
the crime of which the accused was acquitted. 32
The civil action based on delict may, however, be deemed extinguished if there is
a finding on the final judgment in the criminal action that the act or omission from
which the civil liability may arise did not exist. 33
_______________
If leave of court is granted, the accused shall file the demurrer to evidence within a non-extendible period
of ten (10) days from notice. The prosecution may oppose the demurrer to evidence within a similar period
from its receipt.
The order denying the motion for leave to file demurrer to evidence or the demurrer itself shall not be
reviewable by appeal or by certiorari before judgment.
30 In a criminal action for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, no reservation to file the civil action
separately shall be allowed. See RULES OF COURT, Rule 111, Sec. 1, par. (b).
31 See RULES OF COURT, Rule 120, Sec. 2.
32 Sanchez v. Far East Bank & Trust Co ., G.R. No. 155309, November 15, 2005, 475 SCRA 97.
33 Vide RULES OF COURT, Rule 111, Sec. 2, last par.
514
514 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
In case of a demurrer to evidence filed with leave of court, the accused may adduce
countervailing evidence if the court denies the demurrer. Such denial bears no 34
distinction as to the two aspects of the case because there is a disparity of evidentiary
value between the quanta of evidence in such aspects of the case. In other words, a
court may not deny the demurrer as to the criminal aspect and at the same time grant
the demurrer as to the civil aspect, for if the evidence so far presented is not
insufficient to prove the crime beyond reasonable doubt, then the same evidence is
likewise not insufficient to establish civil liability by mere preponderance of evidence.
On the other hand, if the evidence so far presented is insufficient as proof beyond
reasonable doubt, it does not follow that the same evidence is insufficient to establish
a preponderance of evidence. For if the court grants the demurrer, proceedings on the
civil aspect of the case generally proceeds. The only recognized instance when an
acquittal on demurrer carries with it the dismissal of the civil aspect is when there is
a finding that the act or omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist.
Absent such determination, trial as to the civil aspect of the case must perforce
continue. Thus this Court, inSalazar v. People, held: 35
If demurrer is granted and the accused is acquitted by the court, the accused has the right
to adduce evidence on the civil aspect of the case unless the court also declares that the act or
omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist. 36
In the instant case, the MeTC granted the demurrer and dismissed the case without
any finding that the act or omission from which the civil liability may arise did not
exist.
_______________
factual, a remand of the case would afford the fullest opportunity for the parties to
ventilate, and for the trial court to resolve the same.
Petitioner finally posits that respondent waived his right to present evidence on
the civil aspect of the case (1) when the grant of the demurrer was reversed on appeal,
citing Section 1 of Rule 33, and (2) when respondent orally opposed petitioners
38
motion for reconsideration pleading that proceedings with respect to the civil aspect
of the case continue.
Petitioners position is tenuous.
Petitioners citation of Section 1 of Rule 33 is incorrect. Where a court has
jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the person of the accused, and the crime
was committed within its territorial jurisdiction, the court necessarily exercises
jurisdiction over all issues that the law requires it to resolve.
One of the issues in a criminal case being the civil liability of the accused arising
from the crime, the governing law is the Rules of Criminal Procedure, not the Rules
of Civil Procedure
_______________
516
516 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Hun Hyung Park vs. Eung Won Choi
which pertains to a civil action arising from the initiatory pleading that gives rise to
the suit. 39
517
o0o