Cosmetics Packaging and Advertising in Korea: What to Check Before Launch
BySangjin Ji, Administrative Attorney3 years of embassy visa practiceLinkedIn
Imagine that Min-su is preparing to launch a skincare brand in South Korea. The OEM manufacturer has delivered the final sample of a cream intended for whitening and wrinkle improvement. The product name has been chosen, and the design agency has sent over the carton artwork for printing.
On the front of the box is the claim "dual-functional: whitening and wrinkle improvement." The online product page, however, promises "skin regeneration" and "melasma treatment."
It might seem reasonable to leave the wording to the designers. After all, the manufacturer has included functional ingredients and says that test reports are available. But having those ingredients and reports does not, by itself, establish that every packaging or advertising claim is permitted.
The final formulation, the records covering the product's recognized functions, the artwork and the advertising copy must be checked against one another. The finished cream may not be the same as the product described in an earlier report, and an advertising promise may go well beyond an effect supported by testing.
The first task is to obtain the final formulation and any applicable functional-cosmetics review decision or notification record from the manufacturer. If the required review or notification has not yet been completed, the brand must first establish which procedure applies to the product. It can then compare the product name, approved or notified functions and supporting evidence with what consumers will see on the jar, carton, online store and social media.
Why packaging information and advertising claims require separate checks
Consider the carton Min-su has received. It contains a product name, volume, ingredient information, the responsible business's details and a date for safe use. These are among the particulars required by Korea's cosmetics labeling rules so that consumers can identify and use the product appropriately.
Other statements do a different job. "Dual-functional" on the front of the carton, "completely eliminates wrinkles" on the online store and "skin regeneration" in a sponsored video all make claims about what the cream can do. They need to be considered in light of the functions covered by the relevant procedures and the evidence supporting the precise claims.
Articles 10 through 12 of Korea's Cosmetics Act (「화장품법」) primarily regulate required labeling information and the manner of displaying it. Article 13 addresses prohibited or misleading labeling and advertising, while Article 14 requires substantiation of factual advertising claims.
This distinction is not merely theoretical. A September 2026 inspection of online cosmetics advertisements identified 63 problematic advertisements, including 44 suggesting medicinal effects. Expressions such as "skin regeneration" and "anti-inflammatory" were among the concerns reported in connection with the inspection. (Source: Yonhap News, September 17, 2026, reporting on an MFDS inspection.)
A compliant list of mandatory information on the carton therefore does not settle whether "skin regeneration" can appear on a product page. Before printing, review the required particulars on the packaging; before publishing, compare the effect promised in each advertisement with the evidence concerning the actual finished product.
Must the inner container repeat everything on the outer carton?
Min-su's cream comes in a jar inside a paper carton. The designer has placed the full ingredient list and the company's address on the carton. Must every one of those details appear again on the jar?
Not necessarily. Korean law distinguishes between primary and secondary packaging, and the required information depends on which package the consumer is looking at.
Primary packaging is the container that directly holds the cream. Secondary packaging is the outer box surrounding it. Where an outer carton is supplied, the required external-packaging particulars must be presented there. Where the product is sold in its container alone, the required particulars must be displayed on that container's exterior.
Article 10(1) of the Cosmetics Act sets out particulars for the relevant exterior packaging. Depending on the product and applicable rules, these include the product name, the relevant business's name and address, ingredients, volume or weight, manufacturing batch number, expiration date or period after opening, and precautions for use. Functional cosmetics also have a prescribed indication, and certain products require additional particulars.
The primary container is not automatically exempt merely because it sits inside a box. Under Article 10(2), a product with secondary packaging must also carry specified information on the primary container, including the cosmetics name, the business's name, batch number, and expiration date or period after opening.
This means that the jar does not necessarily need to reproduce the entire ingredient list and business address printed on the carton. It does, however, need to carry the particulars that the law independently requires on the primary container. Product-specific exceptions, including those applicable to certain soap products, must be considered separately.
A practical detail often gets missed when a printer receives the final artwork. Suppose the proof simply says "batch number printed separately." The design may be finished, but no one has confirmed where or how the manufacturer will apply the actual batch number to the production units.
A batch number identifies the manufacturing batch. An expiration date tells the consumer until when the product can be used. The two details serve different purposes and must be distinguishable. If the manufacturer will print them in a separate production step, Min-su should confirm the placement and method for both the carton and the jar, as applicable, and verify the markings on the finished units.
If the product displays a period after opening, such as "12 months after opening," rather than an expiration date, the manufacturing date must also be displayed. The packaging needs to convey both when the product was manufactured and the applicable period of use after opening.
Retail prices belong to a different part of the process
A cream can be sold through the brand's own online store and supplied to independent cosmetics retailers. The retail price may differ between those outlets.
Under Article 11 of the Cosmetics Act and Article 20 of its Enforcement Rule, the person directly selling the cosmetic to consumers is responsible for displaying the selling price. The OEM manufacturer does not have to preprint a single final retail price for every retailer onto every carton.
The MFDS notice governing cosmetics price displays generally provides for prices to be indicated on individual products by means such as a label or tag. Where the selling or display arrangement makes an individual label impractical, the product name and price may be displayed separately in a manner readily visible to consumers, subject to the relevant conditions.
When approving the carton, therefore, distinguish information that belongs on the product itself from the price that the particular consumer-facing seller must display. The first question is where the product will be sold and who will sell it.
Korean-language labeling for products sold in Korea
Brands considering both domestic and export sales sometimes prepare English-led packaging artwork that they hope to reuse in every market. That may be appealing from a design perspective, but domestic cosmetics labeling still has to meet Korea's language requirements.
Article 12 of the Cosmetics Act and Article 21 of its Enforcement Rule establish the requirements for Korean-language labeling. English product names or other foreign-language text may appear alongside the required information. They do not, however, replace the legally required Korean particulars for products sold domestically.
Ingredient labeling must also use the appropriate standardized ingredient names. The final review should therefore check the business details, ingredients, date information and precautions required for the Korean market, even if the front of the carton is predominantly in English.
By the time Min-su approves printing, three separate questions should have answers: what will actually be marked on the manufactured jar and carton, how the retail seller will display the price, and whether the domestic labeling particulars are presented as required in Korean.
Can small trial sizes carry less information?
Now imagine the same cream offered in three versions: a 100 mL regular product, a 30 mL travel size and a 5 mL trial size. The designer says that the smallest containers cannot accommodate the full ingredient list.
Korean cosmetics law does provide for simplified labeling in certain situations. But a small package and a product manufactured for sampling are not necessarily the same legal category. The applicable relief depends on volume or weight, product type and purpose.
Article 19(1)(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Cosmetics Act (「화장품법 시행규칙」) provides for simplified particulars for certain cosmetics containing 10 mL or less, or weighing 10 g or less. The permitted simplified information includes specified items such as the product name, relevant business name, price, batch number, and expiration date or period after opening, subject to the rule's conditions.
A non-sale sample involves another distinction. Article 19(1)(2) addresses cosmetics manufactured or imported for consumers to test or use when choosing a product, rather than for sale. In that case, marking it as a "sample" or "not for sale" takes the place of displaying a selling price under the applicable simplified-labeling provision.
Giving something away at no charge does not, by itself, answer whether the item was made or imported for the sampling purpose described in that rule. The brand must distinguish a genuine trial sample from ordinary sale stock distributed free of charge.
Nor does simplified labeling mean that a jar may carry no information. Where the product has secondary packaging, the primary-container obligations under Article 10(2) must still be checked, including the product name, business name, batch number and applicable use-date information.
The 30 mL travel cream is different again. Under Article 19(2), cosmetics containing more than 10 mL but no more than 50 mL, or weighing more than 10 g but no more than 50 g, may omit certain ingredient particulars within the scope allowed by the rule. This is not a general exemption from all labeling requirements. Product identity, business details, batch number, expiration date and other required items remain subject to their respective rules.
The ingredient exception is also limited. The rule identifies categories of ingredients that must still be indicated, including tar colorants, gold leaf, alpha-hydroxy acids (AHAs), ingredients responsible for a functional cosmetic's recognized effect, ingredients subject to MFDS use limits, and the types of phosphates used in shampoos and conditioners, as applicable.
For a whitening and wrinkle-improvement cream, Min-su should identify the ingredients responsible for those functions in the final formula and check that the 30 mL product does not omit particulars that must remain visible.
Where some ingredients are lawfully omitted from a small package, consumers must nevertheless have a way to check all the ingredients. Article 19(5) provides for access through a telephone number or website address on the package, or an available printed reference showing the full ingredient list at the point of sale, in accordance with its requirements.
A brand therefore cannot simply remove an ingredient list because there is insufficient room on the travel-size box. It must identify what may be omitted and make the complete ingredient information available through the permitted route.
The product category matters as well. Under the MFDS notice effective August 5, 2026, external genital cleansers and eyelash permanent-wave products are among the products excluded from the relevant small-size labeling simplification and partial ingredient-omission rules. Separate sample provisions and product-specific requirements still need to be assessed on their own terms.
Ingredients and product type may also trigger precautions or allergen-related labeling under the relevant schedules of the Enforcement Rule and MFDS notices. A 5 mL label cannot be approved solely because the package holds 5 mL.
Before signing off on these variants, Min-su should establish the actual purpose of the 5 mL sample, the applicable rule for the 30 mL travel product, the ingredients that must still appear, and the method by which consumers can obtain the full ingredient list. The manufacturer's final ingredient data must be the basis for each artwork version.
Does including an ingredient in the product name require a concentration statement?
Suppose Min-su chooses the product name "Misobeauty Niacinamide Cream." The name tells consumers that niacinamide is present. It may also bring an additional labeling obligation into play.
Article 19(4)(3) of the Enforcement Rule requires the ingredient's name and concentration to be displayed when an ingredient name is used as part of the cosmetic's product name. Fragrance products are an exception to this particular rule.
Ordinary ingredient labeling generally does not require the concentration of every ingredient to be stated individually. Where an ingredient is used in the product name, however, the applicable concentration statement needs to match what is actually in the finished product.
The manufacturer's final formula is the starting point. Suppose the finished product contains 2% niacinamide. Its required concentration statement should correspond to that actual concentration.
Now suppose the manufacturer instead provides a document saying "2% niacinamide complex." That is not necessarily the same thing. A complex may contain niacinamide alongside other components. Using 2% of the complex does not prove that the finished cream contains 2% niacinamide itself.
The brand needs to compare the supplier's composition information for the complex with the manufacturer's final blending ratios. It should not transfer a percentage from the supplier's document directly to the carton without establishing what that percentage measures.
The distinction between the prototype and the final production formula also matters. A prototype may have contained an ingredient at 2%, only for the manufacturer to adjust the formula before mass production. Packaging for the sale product must be based on that final composition rather than on an earlier sample report.
The same type of misunderstanding can arise with natural or organic ingredients. Imagine a supplier's document describing an ingredient as "100% natural extract." That figure might refer to the supplied ingredient itself. It does not establish that the finished cosmetic consists entirely of that extract.
Article 19(4)(5) also requires ingredient-concentration information when a cosmetic is labeled or advertised as natural or organic, under the applicable requirements. A formula containing a natural ingredient does not automatically qualify the complete product for the designation "natural cosmetic" or "organic cosmetic." The relevant standards for the finished product must be assessed separately.
For Min-su, two records matter particularly: the final production formula and, where necessary, the composition and concentration details of any compound ingredient supplied to the manufacturer. Those documents allow the brand to distinguish an ingredient's name from the amount actually present in the finished cosmetic.
But a correct concentration statement is not enough to justify a dual-functional claim. That is a different legal question.
When can a cream be labeled "dual-functional: whitening and wrinkle improvement"?
Niacinamide is used for whitening functionality and adenosine for wrinkle-improvement functionality in cosmetics. If Min-su's cream contains both ingredients, may the carton automatically describe the product as dual-functional?
No. The relevant issue is whether the finished product has completed the required functional-cosmetics review or notification procedures for both functions, not simply whether ingredients commonly associated with those functions were added.
Article 13(1)(2) of the Cosmetics Act prohibits labeling or advertising that could cause a non-functional cosmetic to be mistaken for a functional cosmetic. It also prohibits representations that differ from the results of the safety and efficacy review of a functional cosmetic.
For example, if the cream has completed the required procedure only for whitening, the presence of a wrinkle-improvement ingredient does not authorize the brand to advertise that both functions have been covered. The two claimed functions must each be supported by the applicable completed procedure.
Functional cosmetics have additional labeling requirements. Article 10(1)(8) requires the words indicating a functional cosmetic or the prescribed symbol. Under Article 19(4)(2) of the Enforcement Rule, the efficacy and effects and the directions and dosage covered by the review or notification must also be indicated.
The brand should therefore examine the functional-cosmetics review-result notice or the notification record for products exempt from individual review, as applicable. Compare the recorded product name, efficacy and effects, and directions and dosage with those of the actual cream and the final artwork.
Suppose the record covers whitening only, while the carton says "dual-functional: whitening and wrinkle improvement." The problem is not something the graphic designer can solve by adjusting the layout. The brand first needs to establish which functions have completed the relevant procedures and what, if anything, must be changed in those procedures or in the proposed claim.
A further question arises if the formula or ingredient concentrations have changed since the product was reviewed or notified. Whether an earlier result can still be relied upon depends on the changes and the applicable rules. The brand may need to deal with the relevant change procedure before finalizing the packaging language.
In other words, three things need to align: the formulation of the product actually being sold, its functional-cosmetics review or notification records, and the function consumers are told the product has.
Why is "helps with whitening" different from "treats melasma"?
Now turn to the online product page. The carton describes a dual-functional cream, but the advertising copy says "treats melasma" and "completely eliminates wrinkles." Is that acceptable merely because the product has completed functional-cosmetics procedures?
A recognized cosmetic function is not a license to advertise a medical treatment.
Article 13(1)(1) of the Cosmetics Act prohibits labeling and advertising that may lead consumers to mistake cosmetics for medicines. Completing the relevant review or notification does not allow a brand to extend a cosmetic's recognized effects into claims that it prevents or treats diseases.
The MFDS illustrated the problem in a public announcement dated July 24, 2026. It reported 178 improper online cosmetics advertisements. Of these, 142 involved the possibility of consumers mistaking cosmetics for products with medicinal effects; 15 concerned functional-cosmetics advertising that differed from reviewed efficacy and effects. Claims such as "prevents vaginitis" or "treats acne" were among the examples described. (Source: Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, reference press release, July 24, 2026.)
For a product that has completed the appropriate whitening procedure, wording along the lines of "helps with whitening" may be considered within the recognized scope. A claim that the product "treats melasma" suggests a medicinal treatment instead. Similarly, a claim that a cream helps improve wrinkles is not equivalent to promising that wrinkles will disappear completely.
The problem cannot necessarily be fixed by replacing the word "treats" with "improves." Consumers receive an impression from the entire advertisement: the product name, caption, imagery, video and any qualification in small print.
For example, a page might use the relatively restrained phrase "skin improvement" while showing before-and-after photographs that appear to promise the complete treatment of a skin disease. The overall message still needs to be assessed, not just the choice of one verb.
The MFDS's Guidelines on Cosmetics Labeling and Advertising, issued on August 14, 2025 (Guidance No. 0086-07), provide official guidance on how to consider problematic labeling and advertising. The brand should compare the efficacy and effects recorded in the functional-cosmetics documents with everything consumers will actually see or hear in the campaign.
What if the manufacturer has supplied a test report? That brings us to another distinction: what the report tested and what the advertisement claims.
Does a test report justify stronger advertising claims?
Suppose the design agency proposes "human application testing completed" and "skin improvement confirmed" for Min-su's product page. The factory says it has a test report, but the document turns out to be a study supplied by the manufacturer of one raw ingredient.
Can the brand describe its finished cream as having completed human application testing on the basis of that report?
The answer depends first on what was actually tested. Evidence relating to the characteristics of an ingredient may be useful as information about that ingredient, but it does not automatically demonstrate that the finished cream, with its particular formulation and concentration, delivers the same results.
The concentration used, the presence of other ingredients and the material actually tested can all affect whether a report supports a particular statement about the final cosmetic.
Article 14(1) of the Cosmetics Act requires businesses and sellers to be able to substantiate factual matters in their labeling and advertising. Article 23 of its Enforcement Rule and the MFDS provisions concerning substantiation of cosmetics labeling and advertising set out applicable requirements for testing or investigation materials.
Substantiation is not simply the possession of a document titled "test report." The test subject, method, conditions and results must genuinely support what is being claimed. Evidence should be directly related to the advertisement and based on scientifically objective, reliable testing or investigation under the applicable rules.
Take the agency's proposed wording. If the supplier's study examined a particular ingredient, while the product page claims "this finished cream has undergone human application testing and demonstrated skin improvement," the subject tested and the product being advertised are different.
The fact that an ingredient was tested does not, without more, establish that the complete product went through that testing. Even descriptions of ingredient effects must be presented carefully so consumers do not mistakenly understand them as proven effects of the finished cream.
A study carried out on a finished product is not automatically the end of the inquiry either. Min-su should verify the product identified in the report and whether it matches the version being sold. If the tested item was a prototype, changes made before final manufacturing may need to be examined.
Next, consider the measured outcome, method and conditions. A finding that a skin-moisture indicator changed under specified conditions over a defined use period supports a much narrower conclusion than a promise of "complete skin-tissue regeneration" or "treatment of a skin disease." The actual results must not be inflated into effects the study did not establish or a medicine-like claim the cosmetic cannot make.
There is also a legal deadline associated with substantiation. Under Article 14(3), where the MFDS requests supporting material for a factual advertising claim, the relevant business or seller must submit the material within 15 days from receiving the request. The submission period may be extended where the MFDS recognizes a justifiable reason.
Those 15 days are not a period for obtaining prior approval of an advertisement. The clock concerns a request from the regulator for substantiation material. Under the applicable provisions, continuing an advertisement without submitting required evidence may lead to an order to suspend that advertisement until the evidence is provided.
That is why assembling the supporting records before an advertisement goes live is preferable to looking for them only after a regulatory request arrives.
For the practical review, put the test report next to the proposed advertising copy. Identify the product tested, the test items and methodology, the test period and conditions, and the actual findings. If the evidence does not substantiate the proposed wording, the brand needs to decide whether the claim should be revised or whether further suitable evidence is required.
Evaluating the technical scientific validity of a test or conducting new efficacy testing is different from organizing the documentation and identifying apparent mismatches. Such specialized technical work belongs with qualified testing or research institutions.
Do social-media posts and sponsored videos follow different rules?
After the product page is finished, suppose Min-su hires a marketing agency to create Instagram videos and sponsored content. The product page says "helps with whitening," but the sponsored video calls the same product a "melasma treatment cream" and adds a caption about "skin regeneration."
Moving the claim to a different channel does not make it acceptable. Article 22 and Schedule 5 of the Enforcement Rule address advertising media and compliance requirements, including internet advertising. Product pages, social-media posts and promotional videos are subject to the applicable cosmetics advertising standards according to their content.
Article 13 prohibits improper labeling and advertising by relevant businesses and sellers. Commissioning a designer, influencer or outside agency to write the copy does not, by itself, relieve the brand of its responsibility to check what is being published about its product.
The review needs to cover more than the post's written caption. Check the spoken script, on-screen subtitles, photographs, before-and-after comparisons and other elements that could convey a stronger promise than the approved product copy. A phrase removed from the online store should not quietly reappear in a sponsored video.
AI-generated videos create an additional issue. The amendment to the Cosmetics Act promulgated on May 26, 2026 (Act No. 21709) provides for a new advertising prohibition effective November 27, 2026.
The prohibition concerns advertising that uses AI-generated audio, images, video or similar material difficult to distinguish from reality in a way that could mislead consumers into believing that a doctor, pharmacist, university professor or another relevant expert recommends, endorses or uses a particular cosmetic.
For example, a marketer might generate the likeness of a fictional doctor to recommend the cream. If the material could cause consumers to believe that a real medical expert is recommending or endorsing the product, the contemplated presentation raises the type of concern covered by the new provision.
This does not mean that every AI-created picture or promotional video is prohibited. What matters under the described amendment is the risk of misleading consumers through realistic synthetic material about an expert's recommendation, endorsement or use. The applicable commencement date and the specific content should be checked before the campaign is launched.
The most workable internal approach is to establish which functional effects are supported by the relevant review or notification and which separate factual claims are substantiated by test evidence. Every agency, product-page editor and sponsored-content creator should then work from those same confirmed product records.
What should be checked immediately before launch?
Return to Min-su's launch schedule. The printing company is waiting for final approval of the carton, and the OEM factory wants to finalize delivery. This is the point to compare the product itself with the information consumers will receive.
Start with the manufacturer's final product and ingredient records. Confirm the commercial product name, the ingredients and, where an ingredient appears in the name, the concentration of that ingredient in the actual finished product. For functional cosmetics, obtain the relevant review decision or notification record, where applicable.
Keep the ingredient-list reporting record separate from the functional-cosmetics review or notification documents. The first concerns ingredients used in manufacturing; the second addresses the functions for which the product has followed the applicable functional-cosmetics procedure. One record does not stand in for the other.
Next, place the final jar and carton artwork beside the production information. Check the product name, responsible business, ingredients, batch number, expiration date or period after opening, warnings and relevant functional-cosmetics markings. If batch and date details are to be printed separately, check the designated locations and their appearance on the actual production units. For small products and samples, apply only the simplifications and exceptions for which the particular product qualifies.
Then examine the final versions of the online product page and social-media advertising. Compare the promised effects with the functional-cosmetics records and the test evidence. Determine whether the words, photographs or video may imply medicinal treatment or make claims beyond the effects substantiated for that specific product.
The brand also needs to know which records it can obtain from the OEM manufacturer and which final artwork the design agency has agreed to deliver. The extent to which detailed formulation information or other technical documents must be supplied depends on the OEM agreement and what the parties have actually arranged. A package designer producing artwork and a business assessing legally required particulars are performing different tasks.
This document review can identify required labeling information, differences between the product records and proposed claims, and further information that should be requested from the manufacturer, supplier or testing institution. It should not be confused with conducting efficacy tests or guaranteeing the legal compliance of every advertising statement.
An Administrative Attorney may, within Article 2 of the Administrative Attorney Act and other applicable laws, prepare documents for submission to administrative authorities, organize the necessary supporting records and particulars, and perform submission work where legally permitted. Scientific efficacy testing and technical assessment remain distinct professional functions. The scope and fees of any paid government-document preparation or submission work are agreed separately.
If your cream is approaching print approval, you can provide the jar and carton proofs, the functional-cosmetics review or notification documents where applicable, and your online product-page or advertising draft. Ethos Administrative Attorney Office offers a free preliminary review to identify statutory labeling points for initial checking, apparent discrepancies between the available records and proposed wording, and documents that may need to be requested from the factory or design provider. Any subsequent administrative-document preparation or legally permitted submission work is scoped and charged separately.
Three-point summary
- Mandatory information on cosmetic packaging must be checked separately from claims made on product pages and social media, which need to match the actual product's recognized functions and supporting evidence.
- A dual-functional claim, a named ingredient's concentration, medicinal-sounding statements and test-based promises each have their own requirements; the existence of a functional ingredient or test report is not enough by itself.
- Before launch, compare the final formula, review or notification records, jar and carton proofs, and advertising drafts against the same finished product.