the sacking does not occur and the upmarketness occurs.
sent1: if the sacking occurs then not the chocking adhocracy but the project occurs. sent2: if the chocking adhocracy does not occur then the quartering happens or the chocking cerise does not occur or both. sent3: the sacking is prevented by the project. sent4: either the chocking adhocracy or the project or both happens. sent5: that the sacking does not occur but the upmarketness happens is incorrect if the fact that the chocking adhocracy occurs is right. sent6: that the chocking adhocracy occurs or the projecting does not occur or both is wrong.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the project does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the chocking adhocracy occurs and/or the project does not occur.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the projecting occurs.;
the quartering occurs or the chocking cerise does not occur or both.
$hypothesis$ = the sacking does not occur and the upmarketness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the sacking occurs then not the chocking adhocracy but the project occurs. sent2: if the chocking adhocracy does not occur then the quartering happens or the chocking cerise does not occur or both. sent3: the sacking is prevented by the project. sent4: either the chocking adhocracy or the project or both happens. sent5: that the sacking does not occur but the upmarketness happens is incorrect if the fact that the chocking adhocracy occurs is right. sent6: that the chocking adhocracy occurs or the projecting does not occur or both is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the project does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the chocking adhocracy occurs and/or the project does not occur.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the projecting occurs.; __UNKNOWN__