Question

People jokingly say that everything is a practical ramification for a woman’s betrothal. Maimonides (Laws of Rebels 4:2) says that a rebellious elder is one who disputes a matter whose intentional violation is punishable by karet and whose unintentional violation requires a sin-offering, or a matter “that leads to something for whose intentional violation one is liable to karet and for whose unintentional violation one is liable to a sin-offering.” He gives an example: if there is a dispute over how many judges are needed to adjudicate monetary cases, that is a practical ramification with respect to the issue that if such a religious court (about which they disagree whether it is valid for monetary cases) rules that someone owes someone else money, and he then goes and betroths a woman with that money, then the rebellious elder would be executed for this. 
What is the difference between this and anything else that is a practical ramification for a woman’s betrothal (for example, if he betroths her conditionally, etc.)? In other words, where is the line drawn?