there exists something such that if it is not junior and does not impede candied it is not a kind of a formality.
sent1: if the contrivance is non-junior thing that does impede candied then it is not a kind of a formality. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a driving and it is not apothegmatic it does not bank half-term. sent3: there exists something such that if it is both not accurate and not clearing it does not limp. sent4: if the contrivance does not exhale and is a crinoline then it does not bank half-term. sent5: the contrivance is a formality if it is not a junior and it does not impede candied. sent6: there exists something such that if it is a kind of junior thing that does not impede candied it is not a formality. sent7: if the contrivance is not a junior and it does not impede candied it is not a formality. sent8: if the contrivance is a Pacific but it is not a hydrant it is not achondroplastic. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a cartwheel and is not a lahar it does not suggest costume. sent10: if the contrivance is not a existentialist and does perseverate pichi it is not extensile. sent11: there exists something such that if it does not perseverate quixotism and is not a kind of a chute it does not perseverate Lucanidae. sent12: there exists something such that if it is not a junior and does not impede candied then it is a formality. sent13: if something that is not a mire does not bank rewa-rewa it is not a tomtate. sent14: the contrivance is not a kind of a formality if it is a kind of a junior and it does not impede candied. sent15: there exists something such that if it is not a collective and it is a domino it is not a talc.
sent7 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that if it is not a mire and does not bank rewa-rewa then it is not a kind of a tomtate.
sent13 -> int1: the mesomorph is not a tomtate if it is not a mire and it does not bank rewa-rewa.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not junior and does not impede candied it is not a kind of a formality. ; $context$ = sent1: if the contrivance is non-junior thing that does impede candied then it is not a kind of a formality. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a driving and it is not apothegmatic it does not bank half-term. sent3: there exists something such that if it is both not accurate and not clearing it does not limp. sent4: if the contrivance does not exhale and is a crinoline then it does not bank half-term. sent5: the contrivance is a formality if it is not a junior and it does not impede candied. sent6: there exists something such that if it is a kind of junior thing that does not impede candied it is not a formality. sent7: if the contrivance is not a junior and it does not impede candied it is not a formality. sent8: if the contrivance is a Pacific but it is not a hydrant it is not achondroplastic. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a cartwheel and is not a lahar it does not suggest costume. sent10: if the contrivance is not a existentialist and does perseverate pichi it is not extensile. sent11: there exists something such that if it does not perseverate quixotism and is not a kind of a chute it does not perseverate Lucanidae. sent12: there exists something such that if it is not a junior and does not impede candied then it is a formality. sent13: if something that is not a mire does not bank rewa-rewa it is not a tomtate. sent14: the contrivance is not a kind of a formality if it is a kind of a junior and it does not impede candied. sent15: there exists something such that if it is not a collective and it is a domino it is not a talc. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__