d) For Judge Carlos Javier Riofrío Corral, the Court sets the sum of US$ 395,151.24 (three hundred and ninety-five thousand, one hundred and fifty-one dollars of the United States of America with twenty-four cents). e) Regarding Judge Alfredo Roberto Contreras Villavicencio, the Court sets the sum of US$ 369,251.36 (three hundred and sixty-nine thousand two hundred fifty and one dollars of the United States of America and thirty-six cents). 250. In relation to Judge Teófilo Milton Moreno Aguirre, the Court emphasizes that Mr. Moreno Aguirre died on March 23, 2007, and therefore the calculation of the unpaid salaries must only be made up until that date. Accordingly, and bearing in mind the respective portion of the annual income for 2007 contemplated in the Certificate of Settlement for the period from January 1, 2007 to March 23, 2007 (83 days), the Court sets the sum of US$ 252,401.64 (two hundred and fifty-two thousand, four hundred and one dollars of the United States of America and sixty-four cents), for pecuniary damages based on the overall sum given in the certificates of settlement for the years 2005, 2006 and 2007 (until March 23, 2007). 251. The Court also points out that although no “Certificate of Settlement” is provided for Messrs. Varea Avilés and Troya Jaramillo, the Income Certificate provided as evidence shows that they earned US$ 109,801.27 dollars in 2004, which is exactly the same salary received by the 19 judges mentioned previously. Therefore, it is possible to equate their compensation with that of the 19 judges (supra para. 248) and they are therefore entitled to receive the same sum as the other victims. Therefore, with respect to the judges Alberto Rodrigo Varea Avilés and Ignacio José Vicente Troya Jaramillo, the Court sets the sum of US$ 409,985.61 (four hundred and nine thousand, nine hundred and eighty-five dollars of the United States of America and sixty-one cents) each for pecuniary damage. 252. The State shall pay the compensation for pecuniary damages specified in this Judgment in three equal installments, 278 on March 30 of each year, as follows: the first payment, on March 30, 2014, the second payment on March 30, 2015 and the third payment on March 30, 2016. If the State should fail to comply with the payment of the corresponding quota on the dates specified in this Judgment, it shall pay interest on that quota, based on simple bank interest rate on arrears in Ecuador, until the effective date of payment. 2. Non-pecuniary damages Arguments of the parties 253. The representatives argued that the judges’ dismissal caused common suffering, given that being appointed as judges of the Supreme Court of Justice in Ecuador was considered as “the realization of their professional career.” They pointed out that, in order to assess the moral damage to the judges in terms of work, family and social aspects, it would be necessary to analyze the national context in order to quantify this damage, especially when the right to honor is violated. They considered that the amount for moral damage could not be less than US$ 500,000.00. 254. The victims’ representatives considered that the Court, upon determining the scope of the measures of reparation, should recognize the damage caused to the judges’ life plans by the State. They argued that “the life project of a [Supreme Court] judge included a 278 Similarly, Case of Salvador Chiriboga v. Ecuador. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of March 3, 2011 Series C No. 222, paras. 102 and 103. 72