36 Guatemala at December 28, 2017, which was Q2,992.36 (two thousand nine hundred and ninety-two quetzals with 36/100). On this basis, the representatives asked the Court to determine, in equity, the sum of US$30,000.00 (thirty thousand United States dollars), shared equally among each of the surviving siblings of Pedro Castillo Mendoza, as he had neither wife nor children, namely: Berta Lidia Mendoza, Dora Alicia Castillo Mendoza and Oscar Castillo Mendoza, and also the heirs of Blanca Delia Castillo Mendoza, and the same sum shared equally between the sons of Roberto Girón and if, at the date of delivery all of them are deceased, the Court should determine that it is received by their heirs, or if they are all deceased, the Court should deposit the sum as a donation to the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund. 142. Regarding non-pecuniary damage, the representatives indicated that, as compensation and to provide integral reparation, the sum of US$500,000.00 (five hundred United States dollars) corresponded to Pedro Castillo Mendoza, to be shared equally between each of his surviving siblings, because he had neither wife nor children, namely: Berta Lidia Mendoza, Dora Alicia Castillo Mendoza and Oscar Castillo Mendoza, as well as the heirs of Blanca Delia Castillo Mendoza, and the sum of US$500,000.00 (five hundred thousand United States dollars) in favor of Roberto Girón, to be shared equally between his two sons and, if they do not come forward, determine that this sum be received by his heirs. If all of them are deceased, the Court should deposit the sum as a donation to the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund. 143. The State asked the Court to declare that, from every point of view, the requests for reparation were inadmissible (supra para. 134). D.1 Non-pecuniary damage 144. In consideration of the particularities of the instant case and the causal nexus of the violations declared, the Court will only rule on non-pecuniary damage. 145. This Court has determined that this concept “may include both the suffering and the afflictions caused to the direct victim and his close family, the impairment of values of great significance to the individual, and the changes of a non-pecuniary nature in the living conditions of the victims or their families.”128 146. In other cases in which the Court determined State responsibility for imposition of the death penalty129 it did not consider compensation because the victims were not executed. Whereas, in the instant case, they were executed and the Court has declared the violation of Articles 4(1) and 4(2), 5(1) and 5(2), 8(2)(d) and 8(2)(e) of the American Convention. Therefore, given the particularities of this case, the Court finds it appropriate to establish compensation, in equity, of US$10,000.00 (ten thousand United States dollars) in favor of each of the victims: Pedro Castillo Mendoza and Roberto Girón. 147. Based on the information provided by the representatives concerning the next of kin of Pedro Castillo Mendoza, the Court considers that the amount corresponding to the victim should be distributed in equal parts among his family members who were identified and who 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 Martínez Coronado v. Guatemala, para. 113. 129 Case of Fermín Ramírez v. Guatemala. Merits, reparations and costs, supra; Case of Raxcacó Reyes v. Guatemala. Merits, reparations and costs, supra; Case of Boyce et al. v. Barbados. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 20, 2007. Series C No. 169, and Case of DaCosta Cadogan v. Barbados, supra. 128