Recent advances in coding agents have shown remarkable progress in software issue resolution. In practice, real-world issues are typically bug fixes or feature requests in which human developers naturally incorporate refactoring as part of the resolution process, resulting in tangled refactoring. Since LLMs are trained on large-scale open-source repositories, coding agents may inherit such behaviors. In this paper, we conduct an empirical study on Multi-SWE-bench, analyzing 3,691 valid patches generated by three agent frameworks with 12 LLMs. We find that coding agents introduce tangled refactorings less frequently (21.43% vs. 36.72%) and with lower intensity (0.66 vs. 1.75) than human developers, although they exhibit a broader diversity of refactoring types. Logistic regression analysis further shows that tangled refactorings are strongly associated with reduced compilability, while exhibiting no significant association with functional correctness. Based on these findings, we propose a refactoring-aware refinement approach that assesses the necessity and safety of tangled refactorings and selectively removes or repairs problematic operations. Our approach improves compilability from 19.34% to 38.33%, and additionally resolves 2.79% previously unresolved issues. Overall, this work presents the first step towards understanding tangled refactoring practices in agentic issue resolution and opens up avenues for future work.