Junsan Case Comments Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration

Republic of the Philippines Department of Justice National Prosecution Services OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR Iloilo Hall of Justice Iloilo City

FERNANDO JUNSAN Complainant,

NPS DOCKET NO.

VI-10 INV14F – 0044

-versus FOR: Estafa through Falsification of Public Document HENRIC PUERTOLLANO, ENRIQUETA PUERTOLLANO, TERESITA JUNSAN, JUANITA JUNSAN, NEMESIO JUNSAN, DIONISIO JUNSAN, MILAGROS JUNSAN, MOISES JUNSAN, JOSEFINA JUNSAN, MYRNA JUNSAN, ANTONIO JUNSAN, Respondents. x---------------------------------------x COMMENTS/OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION F O R R E C O N S I D E R AT I O N F I L E D BY T H E COMPLAINANT RESPONDENTS TERESITA, JUANITA, NEMESIO, DIONISIO, MILAGROS, MOISES, JOSEFINA , MYRNA and ANTONIO, all surnamed JUNSAN, though the undersigned counsel, unto the Honorable City Prosecutor , respectfully file their comments/opposition to the motion for reconsideration filed by the Complainant, on the resolution of the Honorable City Prosecutor dismissing the instant complaint and state as follows: 1. That, Respondents all surnamed JUNSAN have received through the undersigned Counsel the Resolution of the Honorable City Prosecutor dated December 12, 2014, dismissing the instant complaint against them ;

2. That, thereafter, the Respondents have received on January 20,2015, the motion for reconsideration of the same resolution filed by the Complainant through Counsel ; 3. That, the Respondents would like to reiterate and respectfully invite the attention of the Complainant that they are all legitimate heirs of their late parents and as such anyone of them is entitled to a share in the property and they can sell the aliquot portion of their shares being co-heirs and subsequently co-owners; 4. That, the Respondents JUNSAN siblings have never committed any acts of fraud or falsification because they just declared that they are legal and absolute heirs of the late Santiago Junsan- their father , the fact has been recognized already by the Complainant as the eldest of all the siblings; 5. That, the allegations in the Motion for Reconsideration of the Complainant, number 2 paragraph 2, sentence 3 contained in page two of the aforementioned pleading which says that the brothers and sisters declared that they are the “only” heirs of their late father is fictitious since the face of the document would reveal that, they declared only in paragraph 1 after WITNESSETH: that they are legal and absolute heirs of the late Santiago Junsan. They have never indicated in the document the word “ONLY” contrary to the false allegations of the complainant. The document denominated as Annex “1”- DEED OF ADJUDICATION WITH SALE” with emphasis of underline provided by the respondents is herein attached and form an integral part of this comment; 6. That, the Respondents JUNSAN siblings would like to reiterate again that prior to the execution of the questioned document attached as Annex “1”, there was a prior document labelled as Annex “2” – DEED OF EXTRAJUDICIAL ADJUDICATION AND PARTITION, which was executed by all siblings including the complainant . The validity and due execution of the public document has never been questioned by the Complainant who was a party to the document. In this document there was already a partition agreement between the complainant and the respondents and this explained the fact that, the respondents have the right to sell the portion of their inherited property; 7. Thus, with the foregoing arguments, the Complainant’s motion for reconsideration to charge the respondent with the crime of falsification is baseless and untenable because they have never fabricated an information about their being legitimate heirs. They have not committed any form of fraud, false pretense or any insidious machinations or fabrication of information since all their declarations are truthful narrations of the fact that they are legitimate heirs of their deceased father;

PRAYER WHEREFORE PREMISES considered, it is respectfully prayed unto this Honorable City Prosecutor that,the motion for reconsideration of the Complainant be DENIED, as it has no legal and factual basis; The Respondents also pray for other reliefs and remedies as may be just and equitable under the premises. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED to the KIND CONSIDERATION OF THE HONORABLE CITY PROSECUTOR. Iloilo City, Philippines, February 4, 2015. ATTY. SALEX E. ALIBOGHA Counsel for the Respondents JUNSAN SIBLINGS Roll of Attorneys No. 46424 IBP Lifetime No. 657901,1-4-06,Iloilo City PTR No.4812357 ,1-5-15, Iloilo City MCLE Exemption Compliance No. IV-001388, August 28,2013 Address of Counsel: A1 Passers Review Center nd 2 Floor, Sommerset Building, Panaderia ni Pa-a Lopez Jena St., Jaro,Iloilo City,Philippines, 5000 Telephone No. (033)-320-2728 COPY FURNISHED: TIROL AND TIROL LAW OFFICES COUNSEL FOR THE COMPLAINANT FERNANDO JUNSAN 156 BURGOS STREET, ILOILO CITY RECEIVED PERSONALLY BY: _____________________________ DATE AND TIME RECEIVED: