the planting does not occur.
sent1: that the mandibulofacialness does not occur and the monochromaticness happens is false if the fraudulence occurs. sent2: both the non-mandibulofacialness and the monochromaticness occurs if the bayoneting limeade occurs. sent3: the putt is brought about by that the influence occurs. sent4: if the fact that the incineration does not occur and the whiteness does not occur is wrong the whiteness occurs. sent5: the whiteness prevents that the travelogue does not occur. sent6: the influence does not occur if the putting and the bayoneting limeade happens. sent7: that the plant does not occur is triggered by that the putt occurs. sent8: the fact that the influencing and the beneficiariness happens is incorrect if the fraudulence does not occur. sent9: the bayoneting limeade occurs. sent10: if the travelogue happens then that the filming does not occur and the bayoneting limeade does not occur does not hold. sent11: if the fact that the influencing does not occur but the beneficiary occurs is not right the putt occurs. sent12: the pinking cathedral happens.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fraudulence happens.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that not the mandibulofacialness but the monochromaticness occurs does not hold.; sent2 & sent9 -> int2: the mandibulofacialness does not occur and the monochromaticness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the fraudulence does not occur.;
the plant occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the planting does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the mandibulofacialness does not occur and the monochromaticness happens is false if the fraudulence occurs. sent2: both the non-mandibulofacialness and the monochromaticness occurs if the bayoneting limeade occurs. sent3: the putt is brought about by that the influence occurs. sent4: if the fact that the incineration does not occur and the whiteness does not occur is wrong the whiteness occurs. sent5: the whiteness prevents that the travelogue does not occur. sent6: the influence does not occur if the putting and the bayoneting limeade happens. sent7: that the plant does not occur is triggered by that the putt occurs. sent8: the fact that the influencing and the beneficiariness happens is incorrect if the fraudulence does not occur. sent9: the bayoneting limeade occurs. sent10: if the travelogue happens then that the filming does not occur and the bayoneting limeade does not occur does not hold. sent11: if the fact that the influencing does not occur but the beneficiary occurs is not right the putt occurs. sent12: the pinking cathedral happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fraudulence happens.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that not the mandibulofacialness but the monochromaticness occurs does not hold.; sent2 & sent9 -> int2: the mandibulofacialness does not occur and the monochromaticness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the fraudulence does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__