33 113. Furthermore, the State did not agree with the amount requested as reparation by the representative. It requested the Court to calculate the probable loss of income of Renato Ticona, bearing in mind the salary he received as a music teacher, based on the salary of Bs. 550.00 (five hundred and fifty Bolivian pesos) for 38 years and a half of work and the corresponding deduction of 25% as personal expenses, and not the probable and uncertain exercise of the profession of agricultural engineer. The State expressed that, maybe, if the Court decides to consider the compensation of an agricultural engineer, the calculation should be made since the year 1985, when he would start receiving the salary of a professional.100 In this sense, it requested the Court to apply the same parameter used in the case of Trujillo Oroza, that is, to calculate the reparations of Renato Ticona as probable agricultural engineer in the amount of US$488.00 (four hundred and eighty-eight dollars of the United States of America) that corresponds to 50% of the salary proposed by the representatives, less 25% of the total for personal expenses. 114. This Court finds that the award for lost income includes income that the victim would have received during his or her remaining life expectancy. That amount, therefore, is considered the property of the deceased victim, which shall be delivered to his or her next of kin.101 115. As has been proven in this Judgment, Renato Ticona was a victim of forced disappearance, and therefore he had suffered damages inherent to such practice. As has been certified by the parties, Renato Ticona was 25 years old and eight months at the moment of his disappearance and he worked as a music teacher at the school “Mariano Baptista”, he was also attending the seventh semester of the career of agricultural engineering (supra para. 50) and, as demonstrated by the several testimonies, was the economic support of his family, composed by his parents, two brothers and one sister (supra para. 32(a), 32(b), 32(c) and 33). In this sense, Renato Ticona suffered pecuniary damages consisting in the loss of income. 116. This Tribunal observes that Renato Ticona was, at the moment of the events, attending the seventh semester, out of ten, of the course of study of agricultural engineering, therefore, there were only three more semesters left to conclude the university studies. Based on the foregoing, this Tribunal considers that such CIAB-LP pointed out that said salary would amount to 7.830.00 Bs. (seven thousand eight hundred and thirty Bolivian pesos) which, according to the exchange rate as of September 17, 2008, equals US$1(1)04.00 (one thousand one hundred and four dollars of the United States of America). The representative, based on the foregoing, made a new estimation of the salary of an agricultural engineer, with more than 20 years of experience, that would amount to US$ 1.027.00 (one thousand twenty seven dollars of the United States of America), which was used as the basis for the estimation. 100 According to the State, the Technical University of Oruro was closed due to the coup d’ etat carried out by General Luis García Meza from July 17, 1980 to May 21, 1982. As a consequence, Renato Ticona could have continued studying as from the middle of 1982, and he would have obtained his degree in the year 1984; therefore, any calculation as an alleged agricultural engineer should be considered as from the year 1985. The State objected to the estimation made by the representative since it cannot consider the 20 years of seniority of Renato Ticona for the professional income of all his professional life. It was a lineal calculation of the income received. The State forwarded to the Court a report from the School of Agricultural and Livestock Sciences of August 18, 2008, which evidences that those students, who entered to the university on the second semester of 1974, obtained their degree between 1985 and 1995. 101 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez V. Honduras. supra note 93, para. 49; and Case of Cantoral Huamani and García Santa Cruz, Preliminary Objection, Merits, reparations, and costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C, Nº 41, para. 166; and Case of Escué Zapata v. Colombia, supra note 78, para. 141.