The ruling on swearing by divorce without the intention of divorce

Question:
What is the ruling on one who swears by divorce that something will happen, knowing that it has not happened, while knowing that he did not intend divorce or mean it?

Answer:
If he swears by divorce that this happened to be believed, and he did not intend to effect the divorce, but intended to be believed, then he has erred and lied. He must repent to Allah, and he owes the expiation for an oath; because he did not intend to effect it, but intended to be believed, or intended to do this act.
He said: He swore by divorce from his wife, he swore by divorce that you speak to so-and-so or so-and-so, he swore by divorce that you buy this, he swore by divorce that you go out for such-and-such. His intention was to command her to do this thing, to obligate her to do it, and to threaten her, and his intention was not to effect the divorce. The ruling for this is the ruling of an oath; in the correct opinion, there is an expiation for an oath. There is disagreement among the scholars, but this is the preferred position.

Question: Meaning, if he lies, he pays the expiation for an oath if he is lying in this oath?

Answer: His intention was to be believed, not his intention to effect the divorce.