In short: No, there are no popular documented cases I am aware of, and it did not appear to be a common issue.

But that does not mean it or something similar never happened. I do have to say that my knowledge on the subject is specific to the Americas and England in the mid 1800s and later where lighthouse development became both far more common and far more effective with the development of the Fresnel lens. If there is something in classical antiquity that refers to such actions, I am unaware of them.

Salvaging from a shipwreck that has run aground is (or was) called wrecking. Technically this means getting salvage from a wreck, but the trope (or a form of it) is a very old one, and also tends to imply that they contributed to the wreck (that is, they were part of the wrecking, so to speak). This could actually be quite lucrative, depending on what exactly came up on the rocks. Key west Florida, for instance, was seeing nearly a wreck a week in the mid 1800s, recording 48 wrecks in 1848 alone.

To discuss your question, we have to discuss the other option for tampering with lighthouses. Perhaps the most interesting part of the current version of the trope - to turn the lighthouse off - is that it is an inverse of the original form. The original literary trope concerned False Lights. To give an example: The town of Nag's Head North Carolina is (at least from the local folklore) named after the practice of putting a lantern on a mule or horse (the Nag in question) and marching them up or down the coast, thereby fooling a ship into thinking they were drifting in some way, which would make them change direction and run aground. Despite the folklore surrounding the practice, there are no actual records of it working there. In fact, there are no shipwrecks associated with deliberate False Lights that I can find, except in fiction.

This version of the trope is not simply present in folklore, it was a common literary trope, appearing again and again, and in different places. Cathryn J. Pearce in Cornish Wrecking, 1700—1860: Reality and Popular Myth, for instance, mentions it several times throughout the book, but notes that she was unable to find any evidence at all that it ever actually took place. This is consistent with what John Viele notes in The Wreckers: The Florida Keys Volume 3. No captain of a ship in the Florida Keys (once a very common spot for wreckers) ever suggested that he had been fooled by a false light, at least that was ever reporting in an Admiralty court. This makes sense, of course: A false light would be low in the water, would not likely be very powerful, and if anything, ships are likely to move away from the light, given that a Lighthouse is supposed to be on land, after all. After the development of the Fresnel lens, it would be even less likely that one could mistake an oil lamp as even a far away lighthouse.

We do have a solid example of where false lights (or...inaccurate lights? False lights in this context implies subterfuge) did cause a series of wrecks in England. In the case of The Durham Lights, for which a number of wrecks are attributed from 1864 to 1870, captains described a light a distance above the horizon such that it looked like a lighthouse, or was at least high enough to appear to be such, and appeared to move. In all cases where it was mentioned, it happened during foggy/misty weather, especially during winter or when it was otherwise cold. The wrecks are historical, but many of the sources like to attribute it to some sort of mystical phenomena. However, the cold temperatures which seemed to be universal for the lights to operate would have been necessary for the formation of a superior mirage. Fata Morgana seems far more likely given the nature of the lights than any particular unscrupulous wreckers, given how the light was described.

At some point, and I am uncertain exactly when, the trope twisted: Now it was not false lights that lured ships to their doom, but rather a lack of lights. I can only assume that people picked up on what John Viele noted about the practice and decided to utilize something more likely to actually lead to a grounded ship, and here is where the historical accuracy gets less clear. A mention of not fully lighting the lighthouse in order to make a ship run around is explicitly mentioned in The Lighthouse at the End of the World By Jules Verne at the start of chapter 11 (Titled "The Wreckers" appropriately enough), which was published in 1905, with the first draft in 1901. This is simply an example of fiction, of course, if you happen to be unaware of who Jules Verne was.

As for a source for the idea of extinguishing a lighthouse in order for ships to run aground, as far as I am aware there is one specific primary source from which most of the justifications for it being something that actually happened spring, and it is not an exact one. It reappears again and again in books on wreckers, and I had originally thought it attributed to a different source before I found the original.

An excerpt from A tour through the British West Indies in the years 1802 and 1803, giving particular Account of the Bahama Isles, Daniel McKinnen, published 1805, is below:

They are minutely known only to those persons called wreckers, who are licensed by the governor of the Bahamas, and cruise amongst those islands for the benefit of salvage, which they receive on all property they by chance to rescue from the waves. Some cocoa-nut trees have lately been planted on one of these keys, as a warning to mariners; but it is doubted whether the wreckers, whose business it is to prey on the disasters of the unwary, will suffer them to grow up, even should the soil permit.

Happening in the course of one of my passages through the Bahamas, to fall in with a wrecker, I held as long a conversation with him as his haste would permit, and was inquisitive on the subject of his occupation. I will set down the dialogue as it took place.

Q. From whence came you?

A. (as it caught my ear) from Providence - Last from Philimingo Bay in Icumey, (a familiar way of pronouncing Flamingo Bay, in Exuma).

Q. Where are you bound to?

A. On a racking voyage to Quby (Cuba) and the westward.

Q. Are there many of you in this quarter?

A. Morgan, I, and Phinander (Fernandez): - parted company awhile ago.

Q. What success in cruising?

A. Middling, but middling.

Q. We have seen very few wreckers to the eastward - are there many to the westward?

A. We lay with forty sail four months along Floriday shore.

Q. Forty sail! Then certainly you must have had many opportunities of being essentially serviceable to vessels passing the gulf stream, by directing them to keep off from places of danger, with which you made it your business to become acquainted?

A. Not much of that - they went on generally in the night.

Q. But then you might have afforded them timely notice, by making beacons on shore, or showing your lights?

A. No, no (laughing): we always put them out for a better chance by night.

Q. But would there not have been more humanity in showing them their danger?

A. I did not go there for humanity: I went racking.

Emphasis mine. Note, though, that they speak of extinguishing their own lights, not subverting a lighthouse. Of course, the oldest lighthouse I am aware of in the Bahamas is the Hog Island lighthouse, built in 1817, over a decade after the above was published, which rather limits the opportunity.

Overall, the problem with the profession of wrecking is that it traditionally was looked upon as a profession for scavengers and profiteers, and as such much worse deeds were often attributed to them than were likely ever true. After all, they were profiting from the result of disasters that had caused human suffering and loss of life. In such cases it is easy to attribute darker actions and motives to people. There is, however, a difference between robbing a grave and killing someone during a robbery.

What is clear is that, given how little actual evidence we have on the practice, it certainly wasn't common, and it also was not a major problem. In the places that actually had enough shipwrecks to justify a large concentration of wreckers, actions that may draw legal attention to the wreckers would be counter-productive for them, given that (as in the Bahamas) they were often licensed in some way. In places that didn't have enough, there would be no certainty whatsoever that taking out a lighthouse would actually lead to a ship becoming wrecked, and tampering with a lighthouse is generally illegal.