Partial Provisional Disposition

A form of decision in which the court grants only part of a request for a provisional disposition and dismisses the rest, or limits its object or scope.

Partial Provisional Disposition

Overview

A partial provisional disposition (假處分一部) refers to a decision in which a court, rather than granting or entirely dismissing a request for a provisional disposition, accepts only a portion of the relief sought. Under the Civil Execution Act, a provisional disposition is a preservative measure aimed at providing provisional protection in a dispute over rights, and in practice the expressions "partial grant," "partial dismissal," and "partial provisional disposition" are used interchangeably. This document focuses on the structure in which the scope of a request is narrowed and limited by the court, and on its legal effects.

Main Content

Concept and Types of Provisional Disposition

Provisional dispositions are governed by Article 300 and following of the Civil Execution Act and fall broadly into two categories. The first is a provisional disposition concerning the subject matter in dispute (Article 300, Paragraph 1 of the same Act), the so-called "prohibition of change of the status quo," which prevents the current state from being altered, such as prohibiting transfer of possession, construction, or broadcasting. The second is a provisional disposition to establish a provisional status (Article 300, Paragraph 2 of the same Act), which provisionally forms a continuing relationship, such as preserving a position, paying wages, or participating in collective bargaining. Provisional disposition, together with provisional attachment, is a representative preservative measure, but whereas provisional attachment aims to preserve compulsory execution of a monetary claim, provisional disposition is distinguished by its focus on preserving non-monetary or status-related interests.

Two Layers of the Term "Partial"

The first is a partial grant in the operative part. This is a case in which the scope of the grant is narrower than the scope of the request, as when the applicant sought "prohibition of publication and sale" but the court granted only "prohibition of sale." The remainder is then dismissed, and as a rule the allocation of application costs becomes an issue for the dismissed portion.

The second is the limitation of object, scope, or period. Here the request itself is granted in full, but its effect is restricted, such as "only with respect to specific posts," "only in a specific region," or "for three months from the date of the decision." In practice, this too is treated as a partial provisional disposition in the broad sense.

Structure of the Decision and Criteria for Determination

The court examines in sequence (1) the existence of the right to be preserved, (2) the necessity of preservation (or, in a provisional disposition concerning the subject matter in dispute, the risk of significant harm), and (3) whether security is provided. Even if the right to be preserved is established, if the scope of the infringement is recognized more narrowly than the relief sought, the disposition is granted only to that extent. For example, in a provisional disposition to delete defamatory posts, if some of the expressions at issue constitute statements of opinion or are recognized as true and in the public interest, that portion is dismissed and only the remainder is granted. The decision is drafted in a structure contrasting the operative part, the reasons, and the relief sought, and it is customary to state the reasons separately when a portion is dismissed.

Effect and Enforcement

A provisional disposition takes effect when it is notified or served on the debtor. A decision granting in part has executory force only as to the granted portion, and the dismissed portion is not subject to enforcement. In the event of a violation, indirect compulsion (Article 261 of the Civil Execution Act) or the imposition of enforcement fines may arise, and criminal offenses such as the crime of invalidating an official indication or the crime of obstructing special compulsory execution may apply. In practice, it is common to apply, alongside a partial provisional disposition, for an indirect compulsion decision ordering "payment of a certain amount per violation."

Methods of Appeal

An immediate appeal (Article 283 of the Civil Execution Act) is permitted against a provisional disposition decision, and as a rule the appeal has no effect of staying execution. Accordingly, it is common for the debtor to adopt the strategy of separately filing an application to stay execution, while the creditor hastens to obtain a certified copy of the decision in order to promptly enforce the granted portion. The objection system (Article 283 of the same Act) also coexists and must be understood as distinct from an application to revoke a provisional disposition on the ground of changed circumstances.

Practical Points to Note

The relief sought should be drafted as specifically and clearly as possible, and if it is drawn too broadly, partial dismissal will result in a cost burden. Conversely, if it is drawn too narrowly, an additional application becomes necessary. Careful design is required, taking into account the calculation of the security amount, the density of the prima facie showing of the right to be preserved, and the possibility of the opposing party's immediate appeal.

Recent Trends

In 2024–2025, applications for provisional dispositions surged in areas such as (1) prohibition of the distribution of deepfakes, synthesized images, and false videos; (2) deletion of and blocking of access to malicious posts targeting celebrities and politicians; (3) prohibition of infringement of intellectual property rights in K-content and characters; (4) prohibition of factory occupation and entry in connection with labor union industrial action; and (5) suspension of construction in development projects and environmental disputes. Many of these are decided in the form of "partial grants," and there is a clear trend toward judging the boundary between freedom of expression and protection of personality rights separately for each individual expression. In addition, with the expansion of electronic litigation and the broader disclosure of decisions, the reasoning of partial grant decisions is becoming more detailed, and prohibitory provisional dispositions concerning the collection of AI training data and the release of models are emerging as a new type.