There is a difference in the varied arguments used to justify this.
"They came from China, so we deported them back to China"
OKish, i can understand the confusion... sort of. Passport says China, anyways.
"The criminals are all Chinese. Taiwan is part of China, so the Taiwanese go back to China".
This is a bit iffy, in all senses. China defending Taiwn as a Chinese territory as a legal precedent? No thanks.
"Most victims are Chinese. So we deported to China because they have jurisdiction"
So, if a Taiwanese commits a crime against a Panamenian, for example, we extradite to Panama? Is there a legal precedent for that?
And talking about legality, I wonder, 35 people running an illegal operation, that is a lot of people. Indeed, how do we know they all are guilty, career criminals? Interesting if it turns out they are really black sheep, in and out of the system, mafia with strong connections on top judiciary. That would be fascinating.