66 172. In the event that the next of kin entitled to the compensations determined in the present Judgment were to pass away prior to the delivery of the corresponding compensation, the amount that would have corresponded to them will be distributed pursuant to domestic legislation.102 In relation to Mrs. Fidelia Sarahí García Sánchez, and in consideration of the fact that, as was informed by the representatives, she is confined in a S.O.S. Aldea, since as a child she suffered an accident that caused her to have brain damage, the amount that corresponds to her, shall be handed over to those who exercise her ward or representation pursuant to the stipulations of domestic legislation. B) Pecuniary Damage 173. This Court enters to determine the pecuniary damage, which entails the loss or detriment of the income of the victims and, in its case, of their next of kin, and the expenses incurred in as a consequence of the facts in the case sub judice103. In this regard, it will set a compensatory amount that seeks to compensate the material consequences of the violations declared in the present Judgment. To decide on the pecuniary damage, the body of evidence, the jurisprudence of the Tribunal itself, and the arguments of the parties will be taken into consideration. 174. With regard to the loss of income of the youngsters Marco Antonio Servellón García and Rony Alexis Betancourth Vásquez, the Court observes that there is no true fact that lets it establish the activity or profession that said youngsters would develop in the future. This item must be estimated as of a true detriment with enough substantiation to determine its probable realization.104 In the circumstances of the present case there is not enough evidence to determine the income that was not perceived by them. Therefore, the Court will determine the pecuniary damage pursuant to the principle of equality. 175. In relation to Diomedes Obed García Sánchez there was not a lot of information on his income. Regarding Orlando Álvarez Ríos, the representatives have arguments that he was an industrial expert in general mechanics and worked in construction; however, there are no suitable receipts in the file to determine with exactness the income he was perceiving at the time of the facts. Therefore, the Court will also set the pecuniary damage that corresponds to them pursuant to the principle of equality. 176. In reason of the aforementioned, the Court sets in equity the amount of US$10,000.00 (ten thousand dollars of the United States of America) for Rony Alexis Betancourth Vásquez; the amount of US$10,000.00 (ten thousand dollars of the United States of America) for Diomedes Obed García Sánchez, and the amount of 102 Cfr. Case of Montero Aranguren et al., supra note 12, para. 124; Case of Ximenes Lopes, supra note 3, para. 219; and Case of Baldeón García, supra note 3, para. 192 103 Cfr. Case of Montero Aranguren et al., supra note 12, para. 126; Case of Ximenes Lopes, supra note 3, para. 220; and Case of Baldeón García, supra note 3, para. 183. 104 Cfr. Case of the “Juvenile Reeducation Institute”, supra note 64, para. 288; Case of Molina Theissen. Reparations. Judgment of July 3, 2004. Series C, No. 108 , para. 57; and Case of Bulacio, supra note 54, para. 84.