93 It is possible to calculate the salary that María Isabel would have earned on completing her studies. To this end, the State can provide information, if the Court requires this, on average salaries of individuals with academic diplomas in activities related to commerce, since María Isabel worked as a salesperson in a store and it can be assumed that this was a sphere of interest. Lastly, it considered that it was: Exaggerated that [the representative] establishes, in equity, for the supposed loss of earnings a sum of US$145,000.00 [(one hundred and forty-five thousand United States dollars)], because, over 10 years, this sum would represent US$14,500.00 [fourteen thousand five hundred United States dollars] a year, which would be around US$1,200.00 [one thousand two hundred United States dollars] a month. 292. Based on the foregoing and taking into professional, it would be difficult for the State to she would have earned, if she had continued her wage established in the country nowadays, from natural causes.” account that “the minor was not yet a recognize legitimately that, in some way, studies, almost three times the minimum the time she left college until she died of 293. Regarding the compensation for non-pecuniary damage in favor of María Isabel, the State indicated that it “had conducted a genuine and diligent investigation […] to establish what happened; [however,] it has not been possible to identify and punish those responsible.” It also indicated that it “took all the appropriate measures to help determine her whereabouts, because it forwarded the report to the relevant office for the search for minors and, when the body appeared, it issued a communication to determine whether the characteristics of the body that had been found corresponded to those of any female whose disappearance had been reported.” 294. The State also affirmed that “no type of monetary reparation is owed for nonpecuniary damage to any of the supposed victims in this case (either María Isabel or her next of kin), because the State has not failed to comply with any of the conditions to which the criteria of the Court refer to establish that non-pecuniary harm is evident.” It also indicated that “the State authorities had conducted a genuine and diligent investigation to determine what had happened”; however, “the results of the investigation had not made it possible to identify and punish those responsible; also, insofar as possible and owing to the very short time between the moment it was informed of the danger to the minor and she appeared dead, it took the appropriate steps to try and establish her whereabouts.” Lastly, it indicated that “11 years have passed since the death of the child and, during all this time, the next of kin have never requested psychological help or indicated to the State that there have been obstacles to their emotional recovery.” F.3) Considerations of the Court 295. In its case law, the Court has developed the concept of pecuniary damage and has established that this supposes “the loss of or detriment to the income of the victims, the expenses incurred as a result of the facts, and the consequences of a pecuniary nature that have a causal nexus to the facts of the case.”360 Similarly, it has developed the concept of non-pecuniary damage in its case law and has established that this “may include both the suffering and afflictions caused by the violation, and also the impairment of values that are very significant to the individual, as well as any change of a non-pecuniary nature in the living conditions of the victims.”361 Since it is not possible to allocate a precise monetary equivalent to non-pecuniary damage, it can only be compensated, in order to make full reparation to the victim, by the payment of a sum of money or the delivery of goods or services with a monetary value, determined by the Court in reasonable application of 360 Case of Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala. Reparations and costs. Judgment of February 22, 2002. Series C No. 91, para. 43, and Case of Liakat Ali Alibux, supra, para. 153. 361 Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.). Reparations and costs. Judgment of May 26, 2001. Series C No. 77, para. 224, and Case of Liakat Ali Alibux, supra, para. 156.