equivalent to US$ 1,614.63 (one thousand six hundred and fourteen dollars of the United States of America and sixty-three cents) […]. [G]iven that the family does not have receipts for this expense, they respectfully ask[ed] the Court to establish the amount of this expense in accordance with criteria of equity.” 248. Regarding the loss of earnings, the representatives stated that “Carlos Luna López was 42 at the time of his death. In accordance with available data, life expectancy in Honduras for the year 1998 was 68.4 years. Therefore, if he had not been murdered, Carlos Luna López had another 26.4 years to live. Mr. Luna had a bachelor’s degree in Agronomy and exercised his profession. […] In total, the amount […] that should be paid by the State of Honduras to the victim’s family for loss of earnings as a result of his death is US$ 404,491.61 (four hundred and four thousand, four hundred and ninety-one dollars of the United States of America dollars and sixty-one cents).”339 249. In its final written arguments, the State indicated that it had not violated any provision of the American Convention and therefore it was not within the Court’s purview to order any measure of reparation. 250. As to the funeral expenses, the Court notes that no receipts were submitted. Nevertheless, the Court presumes, as it has in other cases,340 that the family incurred various expenses related to Mr. Luna’s death. In relation to lost earnings, the Court takes into account the victim’s age at the time of his death, life expectancy in Honduras and the minimum salary corresponding to Mr. Luna López’s profession.341 Given that the State was found responsible for violations of the obligation to guarantee the right to life, the Court orders the State to pay an amount proportional to US$ 200,000 (two hundred thousand dollars of the United States of America), to the family of Carlos Luna López as compensation for loss of earnings and funeral expenses, in accordance with paragraph 254 of this Judgment. D.2. Non-pecuniary damage 251. In its case law, the Court has developed the concept of non-pecuniary damage and has established that this “may include both the suffering and affliction caused by the violation as well as the impairment of highly significant personal values and also changes of a non-pecuniary nature in the living conditions of the victims.”342 D.2.1. Non-pecuniary damage of Carlos Luna López 339 The representatives stated that the salaries that Mr. Luna failed to receive up to April 2012, amount to L 4,676,282.90 (four million six hundred and seventy-six thousand two hundred eighty-two lempiras and ninety cents), which is equivalent to US$ 242,420.05 (two hundred and forty-two thousand four hundred and twenty dollars United States of America and five cents). Furthermore, they indicated that in order to calculate the remaining salaries, from May 2012, until he would have reached the life expectancy age (another 12.4 years), the final minimum salary for 2012 was considered. Moreover, they added the corresponding interest, which was 6% in other cases. Additionally, in his position as City Councilman, Mr. Luna López earned an allowance for his attendance at Municipal meetings. Had he remained in this post, Mr. Luna would have received the sum of L 290,000 (two hundred ninety thousand lempiras), the equivalent in US$ 15,033 (fifteen thousand and thirty-three dollars of the United States of America) (Merits file, pages 220 to 222). 340 Cf. Case of the Gómez Paquiyauri Brothers v. Peru. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 8, 2004. Series C, No. 110, para. 207 and Case of the Barrios Family, supra, para. 362. 341 Cf. Case of Bámaca Velásquez. Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 43 and Case of Gudiel Álvarez et al. (Military Journal) v. Guatemala. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 20, 2012. Series C, No. 253, paras. 362 to 363. 342 Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.), supra, para. 224 and Case of Suárez Peralta, supra, para. 212. 71