I played with black this game but although I´ve win I didn´t feel very well in the opening and firts part of middlegame, I don't know where he make a mistake, anyway I had troubles with this white system before, however I don't have these games to show you.

On first glance, 5. ... Be4 looks ugly; why waste a tempo trading a perfectly good bishop aimed at his king? Try 5. ... c5 instead, attacking the center; you want white to trade pawns and activate your other bishop, so follow up with Nc6, Bd6, and put pressure on white's center. Better than creating white square weaknesses to no effect. For what it's worth, my copy of Shredder for iPhone evaluated Be4 at +.54, and c5 at +.16.

I can't find anything tactically wrong.  You spent an extra tempo in the opening trading your light square bishop but position appeared closed enough for it to work. If I had to criticize white's play I would say that attacking you with one knight on the side of the board where white has no advantage is incorrect. A more active plan is the occupying e5 with a piece and playing stuff like g4 etc... 14.cxd5 has to be a mistake in my humble opinion.  Opening the e file only favors black as you proved in the endgame. Better is maybe something like 14. b3 to develop the bishop or 14.b4 maybe in an attempt to gain a bunch of space and dxc4 is always met by taking back with a knight which probably helps white.

Btw I agree with Edgehopper about 5..c5.  Thematic pawn preak that comes up in this pawn structure via alot of openings.

These Stonewall-type attacks are awkward to deal with. White has a ready-made attacking sheme, and Black has to exercise some care. The idea of getting rid of White's "attacking" Bishop makes sense, but 4....Ba6 was a more efficient way of accomplishing that goal. 

There was no need to allow that Knight to sit on c6. 10...Qd7 11.Ne5 Be7 looks like a good way to equalize. But with a little help from White you ended up with a ggod game.

I think you could have ended the game faster with 25...R8xe5. If 26.fxe5 then 26...Qf2+ 27.Kh1 Qh4. And if 26.dxe5 then 26....Qxf4.

Yes I know Be4 was bad, just an instintive move I have tendence to simplificate cause I'm more strong when are lest pieces on de board and more space. So if white had played correctly plan like keep a knight at e5, b3 and c4 or g4 like you said, followed by a king attack with a tipically manoubre Rf3-Rh3 I would be in serious problems. Sorry if my english isn´t good.

Your english of OK. I think the idea behind Be4, which was to get rid of Whites "attacking" Bishop, was perfectly good. I was just suggesting that 4...Ba6, which I've used myself, was a better way to do it.

Don't wear a hoodie.