Mercury, let me ask a few more questions, so I can get my bearings here.
First, I don't understand your answer in #7.
Second, re #8--the quoted paragraph that starts with "The civil procedure code"--is that a quote from the injunction order itself?
I ask because, IMO, the court's own words need to be translated as closely as (reasonably) possible. And I cannot tell whether that quote comes from the court's order itself, or whether you are sending it to your clients as supplemental, explanatory information? (The quote appears to be a commentary on the law rather than the court's own words--though, of course, courts do sometimes support their decisions by quoting others' commentaries.)
What I'd like to say about the quote is that, unless it is language the court itself explicitly uses in its decision, I think I'd rework it.
Another point of confusion: You quote ZPO 32, but don't tell us exactly why.
More to the point, assuming ZPO 32 is the basis for jurisdiction, why not rely on it directly and exclusively--it's more straightforward than is the aforementioned quote. (And then there are decisions to make regarding the official English translation, which, though probably understandable enough, is not great English.)
In short, I have a tentative opinion about your proposed language in #8, but I'll wait till I better understand the background.
Are you dealing here with (what we in America would call) a trial court's injunction order? Or has a trial court's injunction order gone up on appeal to a court of appeals--and it's the appellate court's decision (legal opinion) you are now dealing with? Or was the requested injunction initiated in the court of appeals, which has now decided to issue the injunction?