"Should" is a dubious word to use here. That's what the law is there, and what you or I think "should" happen isn't relevant.

It's relevant for other tourists who want to know the level of risk they are subjecting themselves when visiting. The Thai resort really Barbra Streisand'ed this.

Really? I should abandon my ethics and morals when I look to a different jurisdiction? If "what the law is there" is unjust, immoral, unethical, I should STFU, because that's what the law is there? That's an 'interesting' world view. It's a convenient one, because standing up for morals and ethics is inconvenient, but not everyone swings that way.

I don't see why not. The net damage might be equivalent to stealing significant money.

Stealing implies one party enriches themselves at the expense of another.

A better term for this situation would be "costing."

I was specifically referring to damage.