31 Considerations of the Court 55. The Court will now establish the pecuniary damage, which involve loss of or detriment to the victim’s income and expenses incurred by his next of kin due to the facts,41 for which it will order a compensation that seeks to redress the detriment to personal assets due to the violations found in the judgment on the merits issued by this Court on May 4, 2004 (supra para. 15). For this, it will take into account the evidence gathered in this case, the Court’s own case law, and the pleadings of the Commission, of the representatives of the victim and his next of kin and of the State. a) Lost earnings 56. The Commission and the representatives of the victim and his next of kin requested compensation for Marco Antonio Molina Theissen’s lost earnings. In this regard, the Commission and the representatives pointed out that Marco Antonio was in third year of secondary school, was two years away from obtaining his high school diploma, and planned to study civil engineering. Given the above, the representatives asked the Court to set the amount of lost earnings of the victim based on the average salary of a “university professional.” 57. The Court deems that it is reasonable to presume that Marco Antonio would have completed his secondary school studies and went on to study at the university, but there is no definite fact that enables it to determine the activity or profession that he would practice in the future, which “must be calculated on the basis of a definite injury that is sufficiently substantiated to find that the injury likely occurred.”42 Therefore, with respect to Marco Antonio Molina Theissen’s lost earnings, this Court sets the amount for this item, in fairness, at US $100,000.00 (one hundred thousand United States dollars). Said amount must be distributed among the victim’s next of kin, pursuant to the terms of paragraphs 50 and 51 of the instant Judgment. b) Consequential damages 58. Taking into account the parties’ claims, the body of evidence, the proven facts in the instant case, as well as its jurisprudence, the Court finds that compensation for pecuniary damage must also include the following: 58(1) it should be pointed out that Marco Antonio Molina Theissen’s next of kin took many steps with the aim of finding him; they went to courthouses, police stations and detention centers, they incurred expenses for photocopies, phone calls, sending faxes, and stationery, and they also published ads in the press and traveled to Guatemala to document the instant case. Therefore, the Court deems it pertinent to set the amount of compensation for this item, in fairness, at US $1,400.00 (one thousand four hundred United States dollars). Said amount must be distributed in equal parts among the parents and the victim’s sisters. The victim’s father’s amount must be distributed pursuant to paragraph 51 of the instant Judgment; and 41 See Case of Maritza Urrutia, supra note 2, para. 155; Case of Myrna Mack Chang, supra note 2, para. 250; and Case of Juan Humberto Sánchez, supra note 14, para. 162. 42 See Case of Bulacio, supra note 2, para. 84; and Case of Castillo Páez, Reparations (Art. 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights). November 27, 1998 Judgment. Series C No. 43, para. 74.