REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT Branch 1 City of Quezon

MR. MALLY VOGUE Plaintiff, -VersusCriminal Case No. 1 For: Qualified Theft

MR. ARMANDO BACLAYAN Defendant. x------------------------------------------x

ANSWER WITH SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND COUNTERCLAIM

NOW COMES, the defendant in the above entitled case, and to this Honorable Court most respectfully alleges: 1. That the defendant admits the averment in paragraphs 1,2,3,5,6,7,8, and 11 of the complaint. 2. That the defendant denies the averment in paragraph 4 of the complaint. 3. That the defendant strongly denies that he received the notice mentioned in paragraph 9 of the complaint. 4. The defendant denies the allegation of the plaintiff that the ground for the criminal action filed was the letter acknowledging the mistake sent by the defendant, as implied in paragraph 11 and 12 of the complaint, when such letter was sent to the HR department of the corporation after the first instance of appropriation of the money by the defendant, which is before his prolonged absence.

By way of special and affirmative defenses, defendant avers: 1. That he is in possession of the money and failed to remit the dues. 2. That the defendant has no intention of not remitting the money demanded; and has no intention of abusing the confidence reposed to him as a sales coordinator of ASSS. 3. That the defendants prolonged absence was due to the fact that he has to attend to his ailing grandmother in the province, and that the place was so remote, being 10 kilometers to the nearest town, and to that effect communication was almost impossible. 4. That the defendant, while in the province ran out of money due to the medical expenses of his ailing grandmother and has to sojourn there for a while in order to raise money to return to Manila, instead of just using the company money he is in possession of. By way of counterclaim, defendant alleges: 1. That by virtue of this unwarranted act initiated by the plaintiff, the defendant was forced to contract the services of counsel in the sum of P 20,000.00. 2. That there were no sufficient grounds for termination of due to the fact that he was not given any notice to explain his failure to remit said money.

Page 2 of 3

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the complaint be dismissed and Defendant be awarded the amount of P50, 000.00

Other equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

City of Quezon, Philippines, 13th of July, 2013.

ATTY. JEREKKO A. CADORNA Attorney for the Defendant

P.T.R. No. 6969 Date & Place of Issue: January 20, 2013 Manila IBP O.R. No. 7769 Date & Place of Issue: July 20, 2009 Manila

Page 3 of 3