27 111. Moreover, it stated that the requested compensation for non-pecuniary damages is not appropriate because the Court's conditions have not been met. Furthermore, Mr. Martínez was allowed to pursue his case without obstruction, and his relatives have never shown a need for any kind of psychological help over the course of many years. It asked, however, that if compensation in equity is ordered, the amounts requested by the representatives not be taken into consideration. D.1 Non-pecuniary damages 112. Due to the specifics of this case and the causal nexus of the violations declared, the Court will rule on non-pecuniary damages only. 113. This Court has established that this concept “may include the suffering and distress caused to victims and close relatives, the impairment of values that are highly significant to them, and nonpecuniary disruptions that affect their living conditions.” 96 114. This Court has not ordered compensation in other cases in which it declared the responsibility of the State for applying the death penalty, 97 but in those cases, the victim had not been executed. In this case, however, the Court has declared the violation of Articles 4(1), 4(2), 9, 8(2)(c), and 8(2)(e) of the American Convention not just for the application of the criterion of the dangerousness of the agent in sentencing Mr. Martínez Coronado to death, but also for having carried out his execution as a consequence of that sentence. Accordingly, given the specifics of this case, the Court finds it appropriate to order compensation in equity in the amount of USD 10,000 (ten thousand United States dollars) in favor of the victim. In view of the information provided by the representatives regarding the immediate family of Mr. Martínez Coronado (supra para. 16), this Court decides that this amount shall be distributed equally among his wife Manuela Girón and their children Rony Disrael Martínez Girón, Irma Yojana Martínez Girón, and Marleny Girón. E. Reimbursement of expenses to the Victims' Legal Assistance Fund 115. This Fund was granted the financial assistance necessary to cover the costs of the statements by affidavit made by Manuela Girón, Rony Disrael Martínez Girón, Irma Yojana Martínez Girón, and Marleny Girón; as well as the other reasonable and necessary expenses incurred by the representatives to meet in person with the relatives of Manuel Martínez Coronado, including the travel, transfers, lodging, and food needed for inter-American defense counsel. 116. On April 22, 2019, the Secretariat of the Court sent the State a report on disbursements made to the Victims' Legal Assistance Fund, which came to a total of USD 280 (two hundred eighty United States dollars), and pursuant to Article 5 of the Rules of Procedure for the Operation of the Fund, it gave Guatemala a deadline for submitting any relevant observations. The State submitted its observations on April 26, 2019, in which it objected to paying for the formalization of the affidavits of Mr. Martínez Coronado’s relatives for the following reasons: a) the cost for formalizing the documents “seems [...] very high,” and b) “at no point were the State’s questions answered and [...] there were several errors in the statements,” as it had noted before. 117. Pursuant to Article 5 of the Rules of Procedure of the Fund, because of the violations declared in this judgment and the fulfillment of the requirements for using the Fund, the Court orders the Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 26, 2001. Series C No. 77, para. 84, and Case of Muelle Flores v. Peru, supra, para. 262. 97 Case of Fermín Ramírez v. Guatemala. Merits, Reparations, and Costs, supra; Case of Raxcacó Reyes v. Guatemala, supra; Case of Boyce et al v. Barbados. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 20, 2007. Series C No. 169; Case of Dacosta Cadogan v. Barbados. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of September 24, 2009. Series C No. 204. 96