The Dilemma Of Realizing The Right To Erasure Of Personal Information And It’s Solution

In 2020,the right to erasure of personal information first appeared in the Civil Code,and in 2021,the Personal Information Protection Act inherited the right to erasure and refined it,and a few disputes over the right to erasure have already arisen in judicial practice.Although the normative structure of the right to erasure is well established,the provisions of the law in force concerning the specific content of the right to erasure are still general in nature,and there is a need for more detailed legal provisions and practical standards to make the realisation of the right to erasure operable.For a new civil right such as the right to erasure,further clarification is needed in terms of it’ s conceptual clarification,definition of the subject matter,manner of exercise and restrictions on exercise to achieve the purpose of right protection.The following four sections are included in this article on the dilemma of the right to erasure and it’s solution.The first part elaborates on the relationship between the right to erasure and the right to be forgotten.The first part of the paper is to clarify the relationship between the right to delete and the right to be forgotten.The first is to examine the theoretical origins of the right to erasure and the right to be forgotten,and to sort out the institutional origins of the two rights.The second is to summarise the widely divergent views of scholars and to consider the implication and distinction between the right to delete and the right to be forgotten.The third part considers the necessity and reasonableness of the legislative choice of the right of erasure from the perspective of practical choices.The second part of the article summarises the difficulties in the realisation of the right to erasure.Firstly,the definition of the subject of the obligation of the right to erasure is unclear,and there is a lack of a typological definition of the person who handles personal information.Secondly,the specific meaning of deletion is vague,and the criteria regarding the choice of deletion method,scope of exercise and time limit are unclear.Thirdly,the regulation of the restrictions on the exercise of the right to erasure is insufficient,and the regulation of the restrictions on the exercise of the right to erasure in the current law is missing.The third part reflects on the causes of the impasse in the realisation of the right to erasure.First,the subject matter of the right of erasure is regulated in a generalised manner,and it is difficult to select criteria for the classification of the type of subject matter of the obligation.Secondly,the objective criteria for deletion are unclear,the technical guidelines have not been unified,and there is a lack of monitoring of the effectiveness of deletion.Thirdly,there is insufficient examination of the conflicting values of individual interests and public interests,and the extension of information self-determination in the public domain is not subject to reasonable restrictions.The fourth part proposes ways to overcome the dilemma of realising the right to erasure.The first is to typify the subjects of the obligation of the right to erasure;personal information processors should include network operators,public institutions as well as offline operators,and finally touting other third-party subjects.The second is to reshape the specific connotation of deletion.By defining the scope of deletion,providing options for deletion and clarifying the time limit for deletion,the standard is clarified to avoid information processors from evading their obligations in the case of imbalance between the status of information subjects and personal information processors,so as to protect the relatively vulnerable individuals from successfully realising their right to deletion.Thirdly,the rules on restrictions on the exercise of the right to erasure should be expanded.On the basis of the existing law,we will give full play to the complementary role of the general provisions of the Civil Code on personality rights,introduce the principle of proportionality as appropriate.Examine the conflicting values of private and social interests,and reasonably protect the extension of the self-determination of information carried by the right of erasure in the public sphere in conjunction with specific cases,so as to achieve a dichotomous balance between individual interests and public interests.