19.

SAMSUNG CONSTRUCTION v FAR EAST BANK AND TRUST COMPANY

Facts

 Samsung Construction maintained a current account with defendant FEBTC at the latter's Bel-Air
,Makati Branch.

The sole signatory to Samsung Construction's account was Jang Kyu Lee, its Project Manager, while the
checks remained in the custody of the company's accountant, Kyu Long Lee.

A certain Roberto Gonzaga presented for paymeny a FEBTC check to FEBTC Bel-Air Branch. The check,
payable to cash and drawn against Samsung Construction's current account, was in the amount of
P999,500.

The bank teller Justiani first checked the balance of Samsung ConstructioN Account. After ascertaining
there were enough funds to cover the check, she compared the signature appearing on the check with
the specimen sognature appearing on the check with the specimen signature of Jong as contained in the
specimen signature card with the bank. Justiani was satisfied as to the authencity of the signature
appearing on the check.She then asked Gonzaga to submit his identity and she later presented 3 IDs.

At the same time, Justiani forwarded the check to the Branch Senior Assistant Cashier Velez, as it was
bank policy that the two branch officers approve checks exceeding P100000 for payment or
encashment. Velez likewise counterchecked the signature on the check as against that on the card. He
then concluded that the checkk was indeed signed by Jong.

Velez forwarded the chrck and signature to Syfu, another bank officer, for approval. Syfu then noticed
that Sempio, the assistant accountant of Samsung Construction was also in the bank. Sempio was well
known to Syfu, and other bank officers. Syfu showed the check to Siempo who vouched for the
genuiness of Jong's signature. Confirming the identity of Gonzagq, Siempo said that the check was for
the purchase of equipment for Samsung Construction. Satisfied with the genuiness of the signature of
Jong, Syfu authorized the bank's encashment of the check to Gonazaga.
The following day, Kyu, the accountant of Samsung Construction, examined the balance of the bank
account and discovered that a check in the amount of P999500 had been encashed. Kyu perused the
checkbook and found that the last blank check was missing.He then reported the matter to Jong.

Jong proceeded to the bank and found out about the encashment and that his signature was forged.

He filed a complaint against FEBTC for violation of sec.23 of NIL and prayed for the payment of the
amount debiter.

During the trial, both parties presented theit respective witnesses. Samsung Construction presented NBI
Document Examinet Flores who concluded that Jong's signature was forged. On the other hand, FEBTC
presented PNP Document examiner Perez who testified that Jong's signature was genuine.

RTC ruled in favor of Samsung Construction and ordered FEBTC to credit back to Samsung Construction
the amount debited.

CA reversed RTC's ruling and absolved FEBTC from any liability. CA held that the contradictory findings of
NBI and PNP created doubt as to whether there was forgery. And that assuming there was forgery, it
occurred due to the negligence of Samsung Construction, imputing blame on the account of KYu for lack
of care and prudence in keeping the checks.