What happened in the Sagales Vs. Rustan’s Corporations Case?

Under Article 308 of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, theft is defined as a crime “committed by any person who, with intent to gain but without violence against, or intimidation of persons nor force upon things, shall take personal property of another without the latter’s consent.” Taking into consideration the factors that acquitted Julito Sagales, it is evident that there was intent to gain despite the stolen item costing only a meager amount of PHP50. One of the arguments in the decision of the Supreme Court was the defendant working for 31 years in the Plaintiff’s company, therefore, entails to having sufficient knowledge at the back of the house in the restaurant he was working for. This became one of the major points of the decisions that led the Supreme Court to believe that the crime committed and the punishment received is unjust and imbalanced. Some justices expressed their disagreement to the decision of the court through dissenting opinions.

The post What happened in the Sagales Vs. Rustan’s Corporations Case? appeared first on interaksyonph.