Short answer. Damaging another person's property becomes malicious mischief when it is done deliberately, out of hate, revenge or sheer mischief, and the act is not arson or some other crime the Revised Penal Code punishes separately. Accidental or merely careless damage is not this crime, though it can still cost you in a civil case.
What the law says
The mischiefs not included in the next preceding article shall be punished
Revised Penal Code, Article 329 — Other Mischiefs. Read the full provision →
Deliberate damage, and nothing else fits
Malicious mischief is the Revised Penal Code's catch-all for wilful destruction of property. Three things have to line up. The property damaged must belong to somebody else. The offender must have caused the damage deliberately — the wrong is in the choosing, not in the clumsiness. And the act must not already be punished as another crime, most obviously arson.
So keying a neighbour's car, smashing a shop's glass door after an argument, or pouring chemicals on a rival's crops is the classic picture. Backing into the same car while parking is not; that is negligence, and it is answered for in damages rather than under this article.
How the peso value sets the penalty
Article 329 grades ordinary mischief by the value of the damage caused. If the damage exceeds Two hundred thousand pesos (₱200,000), the penalty is arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods. If it is over Forty thousand pesos (₱40,000) but not more than ₱200,000, the penalty drops a step. If the damage does not exceed ₱40,000 or cannot be estimated at all, the penalty is arresto menor or a fine.
These figures come from Republic Act No. 10951 (2017), which revalued the property amounts and fines throughout the Code. Older reproductions still print the 1930 amounts. Check the edition of any copy you are reading before relying on the numbers in it.
The heavier bracket sits in the preceding article
Notice that Article 329 opens by excluding the mischiefs covered by the article immediately before it. That earlier provision carries the aggravated forms — damage aimed at obstructing public functions or public utilities, at causing derailment or damage to railways, at spreading infection among cattle, or at damaging works of public use or the property of the State. Those carry a heavier penalty and are prosecuted under that provision instead.
Article 329 is therefore the residual rule: everything wilful that the heavier article does not reach. In everyday neighbourhood and family disputes it is the one that usually applies.
Proving it, and what else you may recover
Value carries the case, because value picks the penalty. Keep receipts, repair estimates, before-and-after photographs and, where you can get them, CCTV footage. Where the damage genuinely cannot be estimated, the article still provides for the lowest bracket, so a case is not lost merely because a figure is hard to fix.
The criminal case does not exclude a civil claim; a person convicted is generally liable to restore or pay for what was destroyed. Complaints of this kind often start at the barangay. Do not assume a shouting match with a neighbour is worth a criminal record on either side. Bring the evidence to a lawyer and get the options weighed before you file.