https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/nov2017/gr_206437_2017.

html
 we can neither speculate on the purpose of these inventories nor surmise on the stories behind
them. While the prosecution insists that the inventories evidenced the discrepancies of the items
stored in the warehouse and those that the company lost, the inventories themselves did not indicate
such fact.

Moreover, it is contrary to ordinary human experience that Prestige Brands did not promptly
investigate the supposed discrepancies in its inventory for January-April 2003. 

 She claims that the prosecution failed to adduce any evidence that would prove that the accused actually
received the alleged amounts handed to her for the processing of various documents.

Th eprosecution failed to prove by direct or sufficient

circumstantial evidence that there was a taking of personal property
by petitioner.

"private transactions have been fair and regular" and that "the ordinary course of business has been
followed