Short answer. It is a separate crime. Article 182 punishes false testimony in a civil case with imprisonment and a fine, and the penalty is scaled to the amount in controversy — heavier where the case is worth more than one million pesos, lighter where it is worth less or cannot be valued.
What the law says
Any person found guilty of false testimony in a civil case shall suffer the penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum period and a fine not to exceed One million two hundred thousand pesos (₱1,200,000), if the amount in controversy shall exceed One million pesos (₱1,000,000)
Revised Penal Code, Article 182 — False Testimony In Civil Cases. Read the full provision →
The rule, and the two brackets
Article 182 provides that any person found guilty of false testimony in a civil case shall suffer the penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum period and a fine not to exceed One million two hundred thousand pesos (₱1,200,000), if the amount in controversy shall exceed One million pesos (₱1,000,000). Where the amount in controversy does not exceed that sum, or cannot be estimated, the penalty drops to arresto mayor in its maximum period to prisión correccional in its minimum period, with a fine not exceeding ₱200,000. That second limb matters: a case with no money value — a status or injunction case — is not outside the article, it simply falls in the lower bracket.
Those peso figures are the 2017 ones
Both amounts above come from Republic Act No. 10951 (2017), which revised the fines and property values throughout the Revised Penal Code. Older reproductions of the Code — printed volumes, review notes, many websites — still carry the 1930 figures, and the gap is enormous: for theft and estafa they show 12,000 and 22,000 pesos where the current thresholds run into the millions. Anyone estimating exposure from an outdated table will get both the bracket and the fine badly wrong. Before you rely on any peso amount in the Code, check whether the source you are reading reflects RA 10951 or predates it.
Not every inaccuracy is false testimony
The offence requires a deliberate falsehood, not a mistaken or confused answer. Witnesses misremember dates, mix up sequences and give evidence that is later contradicted by documents; that is ordinary litigation and it is dealt with by the court weighing credibility, not by a prosecution. What this article targets is a person who knowingly testifies to something untrue. The falsehood must also be material — it has to bear on a fact in issue, not on some collateral detail no one relied on. And the testimony must have been given in a civil case; false statements elsewhere fall under separate provisions on false testimony in criminal cases or on perjury in sworn statements.
What it does not do, and what to do about a lying witness
This article does not fix your civil case. A conviction does not automatically reverse a judgment obtained on false evidence, and it does not compensate you — relief from the judgment and damages are pursued through separate remedies with their own strict requirements and deadlines. It is also a criminal prosecution, brought by the State and requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt, which is a far higher bar than persuading a judge that a witness was unreliable. Practically, the far more effective response during the case is to destroy the testimony while it is being given: confront the witness with the documents, the prior inconsistent statement, or the record that contradicts him, and make sure the contradiction is captured in the transcript. Keep the transcript and the exhibits, and discuss with your lawyer whether a separate complaint is worth the effort or whether the litigation remedies serve you better.