Practice question
A judgment separately orders a criminal fine and civil damages. The insolvent convict validly serves the subsidiary personal liability for the fine. Later, his financial circumstances improve. He claims the service both extinguished the damages and permanently relieved him of the fine. Which answer follows Article 39 and Nanzan?
- Both liabilities necessarily disappear.
- Only civil damages disappear.
- Subsidiary service never distinguishes a fine from damages.
- The damages are not extinguished by that service, and Article 39 preserves the fine if financial circumstances improve.
- The victim's damages automatically become a new prison term.
Legal references
- RA 10159, Section 1 amending RPC Article 39, subsidiary personal liability: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2012/ra_10159_2012.html
- Nanzan v People, G.R. No. 262084, April 3, 2024, main decision, fine distinct from civil indemnity and current subsidiary rate: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2024/apr2024/gr_262084_2024.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.