the fact that the uneasiness and/or the vice occurs does not hold.
sent1: the flicking Bench occurs if the fact that the entrepreneurialness happens is correct. sent2: if the varnishing chauffeur happens then the management happens. sent3: the uneasiness occurs if the secondariness occurs. sent4: if the management but not the secondariness occurs the fact that the entrepreneurialness occurs is correct. sent5: the varnishing chauffeur or the covetousness or both happens. sent6: the covetousness prevents that the management does not occur. sent7: the flicking Bench does not occur.
sent5 & sent2 & sent6 -> int1: the management occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the secondariness does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the management occurs and the secondary does not occur.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the entrepreneurialness occurs.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: that the flicking Bench happens hold.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the secondariness happens is correct.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the uneasiness occurs.; int7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the uneasiness and/or the vice occurs does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the flicking Bench occurs if the fact that the entrepreneurialness happens is correct. sent2: if the varnishing chauffeur happens then the management happens. sent3: the uneasiness occurs if the secondariness occurs. sent4: if the management but not the secondariness occurs the fact that the entrepreneurialness occurs is correct. sent5: the varnishing chauffeur or the covetousness or both happens. sent6: the covetousness prevents that the management does not occur. sent7: the flicking Bench does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 & sent2 & sent6 -> int1: the management occurs.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the secondariness does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the management occurs and the secondary does not occur.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the entrepreneurialness occurs.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: that the flicking Bench happens hold.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the fact that the secondariness happens is correct.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the uneasiness occurs.; int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__