163. In its case law, the Court has developed the concept of pecuniary damage and has established that it supposes the loss of, or harm to, the victims’ earnings, the expenses incurred as a result of the facts, and the consequences of a pecuniary nature that have a causal nexus with the facts of the case.178 The case law has also asserted repeatedly that damages serve a clearly compensatory purpose, and the nature and amount depend on the injury caused; thus, they may not entail either enrichment or impoverishment for the victims or their successors. 179 164. Although the representatives did not provide documentation of consequential damage amounts, it can be assumed that Mr. Tabares Toro's family members incurred various expenses as a result of the forced disappearance and the search that has lasted over 25 years. The Court recalls that after the victim's disappearance, his relatives—especially María Elena Tabares Toro—made various attempts to obtain information on his fate and whereabouts from several Colombian institutions and organizations. The Court believes the State should provide compensation for those expenses, as they have a direct causal nexus with the violations in this case. In view of the specifics of this case, the Court finds it appropriate to set, in equity, the sum of USD 15,000.00 as compensation for consequential damage, which shall be paid within one year of the notification of this judgment to María Elena Toro Torres. 165. With respect to lost income, the Court holds, as it has in other cases of forced disappearance,180 that when the victim's whereabouts are unknown, it is possible to apply the criteria of compensation for lost income, which includes income the victim would likely have earned during their lifetime. The representatives submitted at least two of the victim's pay receipts—for June and July of 1997—and reported on life expectancy in Colombia for that year. This Court finds that this evidence is insufficient to calculate with certainty the appropriate amount. It is reasonable to assume, however, that Mr. Tabares suffered a loss of earnings. Accordingly, the Court sets, in equity, the total sum of USD 90,000.00 for lost income for Óscar Iván Tabares Toro, which shall be paid to his mother, María Elena Toro Torres, within one year of the notification of this judgment. 166. In addition, the Court has developed in its case law the concept of non-pecuniary damage and has established that this can encompass pain and suffering caused to the direct victim and their immediate family, such as harm to values of great importance to them, as well as changes of a non-pecuniary nature in the living conditions of the victim or their family. 181 Since it is not possible to assign a precise monetary value to non-pecuniary damage, it can only be compensated, for the purposes of comprehensive reparation to the victim, by the payment of a sum of money or the provision of goods or services with a monetary value determined by the Court in reasonable application of sound judicial criteria and based on equity. 182 167. Bearing in mind the compensation ordered by the Inter-American Court in other cases of forced disappearance, the circumstances of this case, and the magnitude, nature, and seriousness of the violations committed, the Court deems it appropriate to order, in equity, the sum of USD 100,000.00 to Óscar Iván Tabares Toro for non-pecuniary damage. This amount shall be paid to María Elena Toro Torres within one year of notification of this judgment. 168. Regarding the non-pecuniary damage suffered directly by Mr. Tabares Toro’s family, the Court finds it appropriate to order the State, in equity, to pay USD 55,000.00 as reparation for that damage to María Elena Toro Torres, USD 40,000.00 as reparation for that damage to Óscar de Jesús Tabares and Holmar de Jesús Gallego Márquez (deceased), and USD 20,000.00 to each of the victim's siblings: María Bibiancy Tabares Toro, Leidy Julieth Gallego Toro, María Isabel Gallego Toro, and Jhon Fredy Tabares Giraldo. The amount for Mr. Gallego Márquez shall be paid to María Elena Toro Torres. These sums shall 178 Cf. Case of Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala. Reparations and costs. Judgment of February 22, 2002. Series C No. 91, para. 43, and Case of Aguinaga Aillón v. Ecuador, supra, para. 127. 179 Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua-Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Reparations and costs. Judgment of May 25, 2001. Series C No. 76, para. 79, and Case of Nissen Pessolani v. Paraguay. Merits, reparations, and costs. Judgment of November 21, 2022, para. 126. 180 Cf. Case of Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala. Reparations and costs, supra, para. 43, and Case of Movilla Galarcio v. Colombia, supra, para. 245. 181 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 Olivera Fuentes v. Peru, supra, para. 165. 182 Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala, supra, para. 84, and Case of Pavez Pavez v. Chile. Merits, reparations, and costs. Judgment of February 4, 2022. Series C No. 449. para. 197. 37