the fact that the tribute but not the impeding absoluteness occurs is not correct.
sent1: if the impeding storied happens the refining prize occurs. sent2: that the tribute but not the impeding absoluteness occurs is wrong if the impeding storied does not occur. sent3: if the semanticness does not occur and the cautery does not occur the refining prize does not occur. sent4: that the tribute and the impeding absoluteness occurs is not right. sent5: the impeding absoluteness does not occur if that either the impeding storied or the refining prize or both occurs is wrong. sent6: the semanticness does not occur and the cautery does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the impeding storied occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the refining prize occurs.; sent3 & sent6 -> int2: the refining prize does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the impeding storied does not occur.; int4 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
the tribute happens and the impeding absoluteness does not occur.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the tribute but not the impeding absoluteness occurs is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the impeding storied happens the refining prize occurs. sent2: that the tribute but not the impeding absoluteness occurs is wrong if the impeding storied does not occur. sent3: if the semanticness does not occur and the cautery does not occur the refining prize does not occur. sent4: that the tribute and the impeding absoluteness occurs is not right. sent5: the impeding absoluteness does not occur if that either the impeding storied or the refining prize or both occurs is wrong. sent6: the semanticness does not occur and the cautery does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the impeding storied occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the refining prize occurs.; sent3 & sent6 -> int2: the refining prize does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the impeding storied does not occur.; int4 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__