Hershey, 17 years old and Kisses, 20 years old are best of friends. They went ALL NIGHT convenient store. Hershey grabbed an expensive chocolate bar "MAMAHALIN" with a price of Php1,000.00. Having knowledge what a contract is and the defective contracts, they went straight to the door without paying for the chocolate bar. The cashier, Kuya Germs, stopped hem from getting out of the store because they haven't paid yet and demanded from Hershey and Kisses Php1,000.00.Hershey argued that they don't have a written contract of sale of the chocolate; she told kuya Germs that under the Statute of Frauds as specie of Unenforceable Contracts, a sale of personal property with a price of not less than 500 pesos must be in writing, otherwise, the contract is unenforceable. Hence, Hershey refused to pay kuya Germs.On the other hand, Kisses argued that the Hershey is a minor and thus, incapacitated to enter into a contract as she is incapable of giving consent. Hence, there is no contract of sale whatsoever as there is no "CONSENT" from Hershey, so she also refused to pay.

(a) Is Hershey's argument tenable? Why? Explain thoroughly

(b) Is Kisses' explanation correct? Why? Explain thoroughly