You're right, the solution did not cover those cases.
I like your modifications.

34 > 32, that's why.

Thanks. So the author thinks 15 and 32 are smaller than 2,5,8 ?

This is great... It took me almost a minute to scroll to the bottom... :-D

"If there are multiple solutions (and there will be), return as far as possible the result with the largest possible values:"

This code may cause endless loop, which means after some time any of the "possible-values" lists cannot remove even one number from itself. For example:
[[7,0,3,0,0,1,0,0,0],
[0,0,0,0,0,0,7,1,3],
[0,1,0,0,0,2,0,0,0],
[0,0,5,0,0,0,0,4,0],
[0,4,0,0,0,0,8,0,6],
[0,0,0,8,0,0,5,0,0],
[0,0,1,4,0,0,0,0,0],
[0,0,0,0,8,5,2,6,0],
[8,0,0,9,8,3,4,0,1]]

This is weird. The test cases are not correct.
[15, 32, 624] should equal [2, 5, 8, 34, 624]. Why? And also, why the test canot not be [2, 3, 4, 8, 34, 624] as 5 can also be separated as [3,4] in this case?

Hi, your solution is clever, but it may cause wrong result.
For example, print(same_structure_as([1,[]], [2,[2])) will return True, which is not correct.

This is really good solution. I love it and have a deep understanding about a function's return value also being a function.