the fact that if the dryer is not a manakin then the agglutination is not a Kobe and is not pardonable is incorrect.
sent1: there exists something such that it is not a manakin and it is not a Kobe. sent2: if something grades Codiaeum then it is a kind of a manakin. sent3: that the agglutination is a manakin is right. sent4: if there is something such that the fact that it is non-piezoelectric thing that does not count depredation does not hold then the agglutination is not pardonable. sent5: the fact that the convector is piezoelectric but it does not count depredation is wrong. sent6: the dryer is pardonable. sent7: if something flaunts the fact that the dryer does not grade Codiaeum and it is not a kind of a flaunts is not right. sent8: the fact that the convector is not piezoelectric and does not count depredation is incorrect. sent9: the fact that the convector is a manakin but it does not count depredation is wrong. sent10: if the agglutination is a Kobe the dryer does grade Codiaeum.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the agglutination is a Kobe.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the dryer does grade Codiaeum.; sent2 -> int2: if the dryer does grade Codiaeum then it is a manakin.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the dryer is a manakin.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the dryer is not a manakin.; int3 & assump2 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the agglutination is not a Kobe is right.; sent8 -> int6: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of non-piezoelectric thing that does not count depredation does not hold.; int6 & sent4 -> int7: the agglutination is not pardonable.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the agglutination is not a Kobe and it is not pardonable.; [assump2] & int8 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the dryer does not grade Codiaeum and it is not a flaunt does not hold.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that if the dryer is not a manakin then the agglutination is not a Kobe and is not pardonable is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is not a manakin and it is not a Kobe. sent2: if something grades Codiaeum then it is a kind of a manakin. sent3: that the agglutination is a manakin is right. sent4: if there is something such that the fact that it is non-piezoelectric thing that does not count depredation does not hold then the agglutination is not pardonable. sent5: the fact that the convector is piezoelectric but it does not count depredation is wrong. sent6: the dryer is pardonable. sent7: if something flaunts the fact that the dryer does not grade Codiaeum and it is not a kind of a flaunts is not right. sent8: the fact that the convector is not piezoelectric and does not count depredation is incorrect. sent9: the fact that the convector is a manakin but it does not count depredation is wrong. sent10: if the agglutination is a Kobe the dryer does grade Codiaeum. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the agglutination is a Kobe.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the dryer does grade Codiaeum.; sent2 -> int2: if the dryer does grade Codiaeum then it is a manakin.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the dryer is a manakin.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the dryer is not a manakin.; int3 & assump2 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the agglutination is not a Kobe is right.; sent8 -> int6: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of non-piezoelectric thing that does not count depredation does not hold.; int6 & sent4 -> int7: the agglutination is not pardonable.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the agglutination is not a Kobe and it is not pardonable.; [assump2] & int8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__