Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments.

What decision would you make in the described situation: a player on 121 or 122 (need to check the recording) sees the road of a neighboring respawn, thus clearly confirming that they entered another respawn through a bugged passage (and it's quite likely that the conga they picked up earlier might belong to that respawn), but did not stop the game, did not inform the opponent, had expert view of the land, and continued playing as if nothing had happened?

Your opinion sounds like that joke where a husband and wife sat down to eat a cake and he accused her of cutting herself the best piece... she said to him—wouldn't you want to give me the best piece? He said he would... so why are you complaining then... same here, the conversation was pointless... the important thing here was the road, yes, but I was stupid and thought it was my 3rd city, completely forgetting about the road to the swamp... I gathered a couple of gold piles there and left when I realized I made a mistake (we were playing at 2 AM, but not a critical one)... the question is, what was the point of writing to Stinger that I had taken a couple of gold piles? It's like in that joke where you already know the answer in advance—they would have kept playing, and if the same situation happened and he did it, why the hell would I write about it?
In other words, cut the fluff: the road determined that it was a mistake, but if you remove the road factor, it's unclear where the line is.
P.S. I don't know why, but Kostya's (Dirty) opinion is always the most reasonable, others are too lazy to think or just say anything to respond?