91 corresponding to the other. The remaining fifty per cent (50%) will be shared in equal parts between the victim’s siblings; and (c) Should their be no next of kin in any of the categories defined in the preceding paragraphs, the amount that would have corresponded to the next of kin in any category shall increase proportionately the part corresponding to the other next of kin. 149. In the case of the victims’ next of kin, beneficiaries of the compensation established in this judgment, who are deceased or who die before they receive the respective compensation, the distribution criteria for the compensation indicated in the preceding paragraph will apply. B) PECUNIARY DAMAGE 150. In this section, the Court will refer to pecuniary damage, which supposes the loss or detriment to the victims’ income, the expenses incurred as a result of the facts and the consequences of a pecuniary nature that have a causal connection with the facts of the case sub judice; to this end, the Court establishes an amount that seeks to compensate the pecuniary consequences of the violations that have been declared in this judgment,95 bearing in mind the State’s acquiescence, the circumstances of the case, the evidence provided, the Court’s case law, and the arguments of the parties. 151. In the instant case, it has been proved that Agustín Goiburú was 46 years old at the time of his disappearance, he was a surgeon in the emergency department and supported his family, composed of his wife and three children, financially (supra paras. 61(15) to 61(17) and 61(29)). 152. It has also been proved that Carlos José Mancuello Bareiro was 25 years of age at the time of his disappearance; he was employed by the company that represented Mercedes Benz in Paraguay and he was studying electromechanical engineering. He supported his family, composed at the time of his detention of his wife and daughter, financially. He also provided financial support to his parents and siblings (supra paras. 61(28) and 61(40)). 153. It has been proved that Benjamín Ramírez Villalba was 26 years of age at the time of his disappearance; he was a public accountant; he helped his family financially and had a companion, María Magdalena Galeano (supra paras. 61(43) and 61(45)). 154. Rodolfo Ramírez Villalba was 36 years of age at the time of his disappearance; he worked on a “chacra” [small farm] and subsequently in an oil drilling company as a technician in the installation of oil wells. Like his brother, he helped his family financially (supra para. 61(43) and 61(44)). 155. The Court observes that, in the case file, there are no appropriate vouchers to determine with precision the income received by Agustín Goiburú Giménez, Carlos 95 Cf. Case of Montero-Aranguren et al. (Detention Center of Catia), supra note 3, para. 126;. Case of Ximenes Lopes, supra note 8, para. 220, and Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 1, para. 370.