It’s an issue! Unfortunately, it’s one that’s almost certainly true in a number of other unreported instances. I mention this to stress how valuable reporting is and extend further, emphatic thanks to nanavippayutta.
In legacy format texts, it’s hard to completely guard against the problem in cases when suttas are being prepared by volunteers who don’t speak the given language (I’d be very sympathetic to the volunteer concerned in the highlighted cases 
). As you’ll know from elsewhere, I spent a horribly long while trying to correct the numbering of Vietnamese suttas, but this was done by deduction with only the help of rather blunt tools, so although I’m fairly confident they’re right, they still absolutely need to be checked by native speakers. The challenge is yet further exacerbated in translations using scripts totally alien to the preparer (already pointed towards here).
Hallelujah!
Weeeell, it’s mostly a relief, but with respect to these two languages it might mean the numbering of any surrounding suttas is also off, so further poking into the matter is needed (I’ll add it to my to-do).
Yeah, it really is one of the many awesome benefits!