Revised Penal Code: Crimes Against Property

Robbery involves unlawful taking of personal property with intent to gain through violence or intimidation against persons or force upon things; theft lacks those robbery elements.

Intent to gain, which may include economic benefit or another form of advantage recognized by law.

No. Intent to gain may exist even if the offender ultimately obtains no profit.

The offender must gain possession or control of another's personal property without the owner's consent under the statutory requirements.

Theft committed under circumstances specifically qualifying the offense, such as grave abuse of confidence or other circumstances enumerated by law.

A serious betrayal of trust that facilitated the unlawful taking, beyond ordinary confidence or mere access.

No. The prosecution must establish a qualifying circumstance such as grave abuse of confidence.

A circumstance specifically recognized by Article 310 as qualifying theft, subject to its statutory wording.

The first involves violence or intimidation against persons; the second involves unlawful taking through legally specified force upon things.

The force must satisfy a method or circumstance specified by the relevant robbery provisions.

Robbery committed in a place and by a method of entry or force specified in Article 299.

Use of a false key may constitute a qualifying method of robbery by force upon things under applicable provisions.

Tools, instruments, genuine keys stolen from the owner, or other keys not intended by the owner for the lock, as described by the article.

A special complex crime in which homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion of robbery, subject to the required connection.

The killing must occur by reason or on the occasion of the robbery for the special complex offense to apply.

A special complex crime in which rape is committed by reason or on the occasion of robbery under Article 294.

The offense involving an armed band formed for the unlawful purposes specified by Article 306.

Brigandage concerns forming an armed band for specified unlawful purposes; robbery by a band concerns an actual robbery with the legally required armed participants.

Swindling committed through one of the fraudulent acts or abuses of confidence specified in Article 315, resulting in the legally required prejudice.

Fraudulent conversion, misappropriation, or denial of receipt of property received under an obligation to deliver or return it, causing prejudice.

Estafa generally involves receipt of juridical possession under a qualifying obligation; theft involves unlawful taking without that transfer of juridical possession.

Possession involving a legal right to hold property independently under an obligation such as returning or delivering it.

Fraudulent representations or deceit of the kind specified by Article 315 that induce a victim to part with property or otherwise suffer prejudice.

The deceit must generally precede or accompany the victim's delivery or disposition of property.

No. Criminal fraud or another specific statutory mode of estafa must be proved.

It is a required element of the applicable estafa mode and must be established by evidence.

Fraud or deceit not covered by the preceding provisions, committed under the specific requirements of Article 318.

Estafa requires a mode and elements under Article 315; Article 318 addresses other fraudulent conduct within its separate statutory scope.

Deliberately causing damage to another's property without the intent to gain required for theft and under the article's conditions.

The prosecution must prove the intentional damage and the other elements of the offense.

The intentional burning of property under circumstances punished by the Revised Penal Code or applicable special arson laws.

The decree amending Philippine law on arson and penalizing specified destructive burning offenses.

Burning property or structures under the particularly serious circumstances enumerated in Article 320, as amended.

The applicable offense and penalty may depend on the property's nature, use, occupancy, and other statutory circumstances.

No. The prosecution must prove the legally required criminal act and mental element.

The New Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016.

Taking a motor vehicle belonging to another without consent, or through violence, intimidation, or force upon things, with intent to gain, as defined by law.

It is an element of the offense, although actual sale or profit is not necessarily required.

Carnapping concerns motor vehicles covered by the special law, while theft concerns personal property under the Revised Penal Code.

The Anti-Fencing Law of 1979.

Dealing in property derived from robbery or theft, with knowledge or reason to know of its unlawful origin and with intent to gain, through acts covered by the decree.

No. Fencing is a separate offense involving subsequent dealings in property derived from robbery or theft.

It establishes the unlawful source of the property, an essential component of fencing.

The Bouncing Checks Law.

Making or issuing a check to apply on account or for value while knowing of insufficient funds or credit, followed by dishonor under the statutory conditions.

Proof of receipt is important to applying the statutory presumption of knowledge and the opportunity to pay or arrange payment.

Five banking days, as specified in Section 2.

No. A check issued on account or for value may fall within BP 22 if all statutory elements are proved.

Theft or qualified theft, depending on the evidence of possession and any qualifying circumstances.

Estafa by misappropriation or conversion under Article 315(1)(b), if its elements are established.