This case involves only a question of law. That is why the Hon.
Court of Appeals has been certified to this
superiority. The question is this: with view of the facts admitted by the appellant, were you may or may not find guilty of the crime of embezzlement of public funds, laid down and punished by the article 227 of the Revised Penal Code? Of the appealed judgment of the Court below the following facts emerge: Toward the period from 9 September 1937 until 6 December 1938, the appellant was a public servant, serving as assistant cashier in the provincial treasury of Pangasinan, doing office in the municipality of Lingayen in the same province. In that period of time, the appellant, in his capacity as assistant cashier of the provincial treasury of Pangasinan, received in the municipality of Lingayen, municipal coffers of Malasiqui, Tayug, Binalonan, San Quintin, Rosales and Manaoag, various amounts of money, which amounted to the sum total of P1,701.26, without any receipt issued by the aforesaid quantities. These were funds of the "Red Cross", the " Anti-Tuberculosa " and the "Boy Scouts". On 6 December 1938, the auditors delegates and Blas Giron and Pedro Velasco, the review and tonnage of the funds in the custody of the appellant, in the capacity indicated above, they found a deficit of P1,701.26, that the appellant could not explain. So this, on several occasions, from 9 December 1938 until 30 January 1939, he was paying to the provincial treasury of Pangasinan the amount defrauded. On appeal, the appellant contends that the quantities of the misappropriated funds were not public, so it cannot be found guilty of the crime defendant. Having admitted that he had received the amounts in question, in the performance of their official position of several municipal treasuries of the province, the mentioned amounts are public funds, by those who must respond in accordance with article 609 of the Revised Administrative Code, which stipulates that: ART. 609. Provision of funds raised by public officials. - Except as otherwise specifically provided, must give an account of all funds received officially by a public official in any capacity or in any occasion, such as funds from the Government. This Court has already decided again that when an official public receives some money, for safekeeping, it acquires the character of public funds (R.G. No. 44363, 17 December, 1937;) People vs. Castro, R.G. No. 41747, August 30, 1935; People vs. Sibulo, R.G. No. 40714; (August 7, 1939). With view of these decisions, it is clear that the appellant, upon receipt of the amount of P1, 701.26, which were free, "Red Cross", the "Anti-Tuberculosa" and "Boy Scouts", was responsible for such amount. No power, therefore, give explanation satisfactory lack of money, when the examination and arc of his books by the Auditors were conducted, have been guilty of the crime of embezzlement of funds public, allegedly in the fiscal complaint. We are with the Hon. Attorney General in place to estimate the return made by the appellant for the amount defrauded as special extenuating circumstances without any aggravating factor that compensates for it. This as well, proceeds to condemn the appellant to suffer in its minimum degree
penalty indicated by law.
With the only modification, therefore, that it understood the appellant condemned to suffer an indeterminate sentence of six months and a day in four years, two months and one day of prison correctional, confirm the appealed judgment, in all its other parts, with costs to the appellant. So is ordered.