A half-open plain paper box on a pale oak table, holding an unlabelled amber glass bottle wrapped in tissue paper

AI-generated image.

The short answer: "Made in Korea" is an origin marking on goods, not a statement about the brand

Overseas brands that want to produce in Korea keep asking the same question: can we put "Made in Korea" on the label? The answer does not depend on where the brand is incorporated, where the concept was developed, or which company signed the contract. In Korea this phrase is an origin marking governed by the Foreign Trade Act, and origin is determined by where the goods were obtained and what processing they underwent.

This article sets out which provisions create that marking duty for cosmetics, what does and does not make Korea the country of origin, and how the test differs between exports and goods sold domestically. The scope is the law of the Republic of Korea, and every provision quoted here was read in the original on 26 September 2026. It is not legal advice on a particular transaction or product.

Key takeaways

1. The marking duty comes from the Foreign Trade Act, not the Cosmetics Act

Article 33(1) of the Foreign Trade Act (Act No. 21065, in force 2 January 2026) provides that a person intending to export or import goods that the Minister of Trade and Industry has published as subject to origin marking, for the establishment of fair trade order and the protection of producers and consumers, shall mark the origin on those goods. Those goods are called goods subject to origin marking.

The details of that list are delegated to subordinate legislation. Article 55(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Foreign Trade Act (Presidential Decree No. 36526, in force 31 July 2026) requires prior consultation with the head of the relevant administrative agency before the list is published, and Article 75(1) of the Foreign Trade Management Regulation (Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy Notice No. 2024-43, in force 8 March 2024) states that the goods subject to origin marking under Article 55(1) of the Decree are the imported goods set out in attached Table 8.

Attached Table 8 lists item codes by HS chapter. The row for chapter 33 reads 3301, 3302, 3303, 3304, 3305, 3306 and 3307. Those are the codes that cover cosmetics and essential oils. So origin marking appears on cosmetics because of this list, not because of industry practice.

One distinction is worth holding onto. Attached Table 8 enumerates the item codes as imported goods. The marking duty in Article 33(1) of the Act, by contrast, names both the person intending to export and the person intending to import, and the marking method for export goods sits separately in Article 56(5) of the Decree. The basis for marking and the method of marking are in different provisions.

A wording point may also help when reading the originals. The current text of the Act and the Decree names the competent authority as the Minister of Trade and Industry, while the body of the Foreign Trade Management Regulation, which is a ministerial notice, names the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy. This article follows the wording used in each instrument.

2. Three criteria decide which country is the origin

Article 61(1) of the Decree provides that an origin determination for imported goods under Article 34 of the Act shall follow one of the following three criteria.

Cosmetics, which are normally made by combining materials from several countries, usually fall under subparagraphs 2 and 3. That leaves the meaning of substantial transformation.

Article 85(2) of the Regulation defines the substantial transformation in Article 61(1)2 of the Decree as producing, through manufacturing or processing in the country concerned, goods with a tariff heading different from that of the materials, on an HS six-digit basis. The basic yardstick is therefore whether the HS six-digit code of the finished goods differs from that of the materials.

Two supplementary devices sit alongside that yardstick. Article 85(3) of the Regulation provides that where the tariff schedule does not separate the headings of the goods and their materials, so that the HS six-digit code does not change even when an activity conferring the essential character is performed, the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy may, after hearing the opinions of the relevant agencies, present a criterion for substantial transformation taking into account the overall characteristics such as the value added and the main processes. Article 85(4) provides that for goods separately specified in attached Table 9, the value added, the main parts or the main processes become the origin criteria. Tariff-heading change is not the only possible test, but another test applies only where a provision says so.

3. Simple processing does not create origin

This is where brands most often go wrong. It is tempting to assume that any work performed in Korea makes the goods Korean, but the Regulation starts from a list running in the opposite direction.

Article 85(8) of the Regulation provides that each of the following is treated as the simple processing referred to in Article 61(1)3 of the Decree, and that origin shall not be conferred on a country performing simple processing.

Subparagraph 5 goes further. It states that even where manufacturing or processing changes the HS six-digit code, the processing described in its items, and combinations of them, still fall within the range of simple processing. The items are as follows.

From a cosmetics standpoint, the entries to watch are packaging for the purpose of sale in subparagraph 3, and testing or measuring, correcting labels, adding water or dilution, and simple mixing in subparagraph 5. Importing a finished product and relabelling it in Korea, decanting bulk into retail units, and diluting imported bulk with water all sit close to activities the provision has already named. Whether a particular operation actually falls there has to be assessed against the process and the product, but the starting point is that the list already names them.

This definition of simple processing is reused elsewhere. Article 75(3) of the Regulation applies each subparagraph of Article 85(8) to the details of the simple processing referred to in Article 55(2) of the Decree, and Article 67 of the Decree defines the simple processing in Article 38 of the Act as activity under the criteria published pursuant to Article 61(2) of the Decree.

4. Goods made in Korea from imported materials: cosmetics are outside that test

This is the part most often misquoted.

Article 35(1) of the Act allows the Minister of Trade and Industry, in consultation with the heads of the relevant central administrative agencies, to set criteria for determining the origin of goods produced in Korea using imported materials and distributed or sold in Korea, which the Act calls domestically produced goods. It carries a proviso: this does not apply where another statute prescribes different criteria for such goods. Article 35(2) requires the criteria to be published once set.

Those criteria are in Article 86 of the Regulation. Article 86(1), however, narrows the scope first. It states that, among domestically produced goods made with imported materials under Article 35 of the Act, the goods to which the origin criteria apply are those falling under none of its subparagraphs. Subparagraph 1 covers goods that underwent the simple processing of Article 85(8) after being imported. Subparagraph 2 lists a series of HS chapters, and chapter 33, perfumery and cosmetics, is included in that list, alongside chapters 1 to 24, chapter 30, chapter 48, chapter 49, chapters 50 to 58, chapter 70, chapter 72, ordinary vehicles of chapter 87, and chapter 89.

So in an origin determination for domestically produced goods under Article 35 of the Act, the thresholds in Article 86(2) cannot be applied to chapter 33 cosmetics. For completeness, those thresholds are as follows: where the tariff heading changes, the manufacturing cost less the import price of the imported materials must be at least 51 per cent of the manufacturing cost; where it does not change, the same amount must be at least 85 per cent. These numbers circulate in the market as if they were the domestic-origin test for cosmetics, but the scope of the provision itself is different.

That leaves the question of what does apply to cosmetics distributed in Korea. What remains is the prohibition on untruthful marking. Article 33(4) of the Act prohibits a trader or a seller of goods, in respect of export or import goods and of the domestically produced goods under Article 35, from marking origin falsely or in a way that causes misunderstanding of origin; from damaging or altering an origin marking; from failing to mark origin on goods subject to origin marking; and from trading domestically in goods subject to origin marking that breach those three. The proviso to that paragraph limits the prohibitions in subparagraphs 2 and 3 to imported goods.

Article 35(3) of the Act then applies Article 33(4)1 and Article 33(4)4 to sellers of domestically produced goods, providing that in that case "subparagraphs 1 through 3" is read as "subparagraph 1" and "goods subject to origin marking" is read as "domestically produced goods". Being outside the scope of the determination criteria does not mean false or misleading marking is permitted.

5. The one line exports cannot cross

Exports have their own provisions for both determination and marking.

Article 61(3) of the Decree provides that an origin determination for export goods under Article 34 of the Act applies the criteria in Article 61(1) and Article 61(2) mutatis mutandis, but that where the origin criteria for those goods differ from the origin criteria of the importing country, origin may be determined according to the importing country's criteria.

Marking is governed by Article 56(5) of the Decree. Where origin is marked on export goods, it shall be marked by the methods set out in each subparagraph of Article 56(1), but where the importing country's origin marking rules require it to be marked differently, it may be marked according to those rules. The four methods in Article 56(1) are marking in Korean, Chinese characters or English; marking in a typeface the final purchaser can easily read; marking in a position that is easy to identify; and marking in a way that does not allow the marked origin to be erased or come off easily.

Article 56(5) carries the following proviso: where imported goods undergo simple processing in Korea and are then exported, Korea shall not be marked as the origin. That single sentence is the sharpest boundary in practice. Where the work done in Korea on imported finished goods or bulk amounts to the simple processing described above, marking Korea as the origin on export is what this proviso directly prohibits. Whether a given operation amounts to simple processing has to be assessed against the actual process; the words packaging or filling do not settle it on their own.

It is also worth remembering that the destination market's rules may take precedence. Article 61(3) and the main text of Article 56(5) of the Decree both open a route toward the importing country's rules. A conclusion of Korean origin under Korean criteria cannot be assumed to travel to every market. The destination market's rules have to be checked against that country's own law.

6. What goes on the label, and when additional marking is required

The marking formats are set out in Article 76(1) of the Regulation. That provision states the general principles for marking the origin of imported goods, and allows origin to be marked in Korean, Chinese characters or English in any of the following ways: "원산지: country name"; "country name 산(産)"; "country name 제(製)"; "Made in country name"; "Product of country name"; "Made by the manufacturer's company name, address and country name"; "Country of Origin : country name"; and a method recognised by the Commissioner of the Korea Customs Service as appropriate under international commercial practice where the origin is the same as that under Article 61 of the Decree.

There is also a route by which that format list reaches domestically produced goods. Article 86(4) of the Regulation provides that where the origin of domestically produced goods may be treated as Korea under Article 86(2) and Article 86(3), the goods may be marked in accordance with Article 76(1), applied mutatis mutandis. As noted above, though, chapter 33 is excluded from the scope in Article 86(1), so cosmetics do not arrive by that route.

The Regulation also gives worked examples of what can be stated alongside the origin marking when Korea is not the origin. Article 76-2(2) provides that, on the premise that the marking does not risk misleading the final purchaser as to the origin of the imported goods, a supplementary marking may be placed alongside the origin marking under Article 76(1)1 through Article 76(1)4 so as to reflect the varied characteristics of each product's manufacturing process, and it gives "Designed in country name", "Fashioned in country name", "Licensed by country name" and "Finished in country name" as examples. For a product planned and designed in Korea whose origin is elsewhere, stating that fact in this form is closer to the provision than obscuring the origin.

In the opposite situation, where the brand's presentation and the origin diverge, the marking requirements grow instead. Article 77(1) of the Regulation identifies two categories of goods as carrying a particular risk of the origin misunderstanding referred to in Article 33(4)1 of the Act. Subparagraph 1 covers imported goods produced on an original equipment manufacturing basis where the origin of the goods differs from the country in which the ordering party is located, so that the final purchaser may misunderstand the origin. Subparagraph 2 covers goods where a trade name, trademark, region, country or language name displayed prominently on the goods or on the packaging or container differs from the origin of the imported goods, creating the same risk.

Article 77(2) requires the origin of such goods to be marked on the front of the goods or of the packaging or container in accordance with Article 76, and where the front and back are hard to distinguish or front marking is difficult, near the marking that creates the misunderstanding. The proviso to that paragraph allows an exception: where the origin is appropriately marked on the goods, the final purchaser can confirm the origin from the goods as displayed at the final point of sale, and the origin is marked in a way that is customary under international commercial practice, the head of the customs office may, in consultation with the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy, treat the origin marked on the packaging or container as raising no risk of misunderstanding even if it is not near the marking that creates it. Article 77(3) requires a seller of such goods, when selling or displaying them, to mark the origin using a sticker or a placard separately from the origin marked on the product so that consumers can see it. Article 77(4) requires that where a country of production or country of manufacture marking required by another statute differs from the origin under this Regulation, the origin under this Regulation be marked alongside it.

In other words, putting a Korean brand name, Korean wording or a Korean place name prominently on the front of the pack can add marking obligations. That is a question to settle at the design stage.

7. What the Cosmetics Act requires separately

Separately from origin marking, cosmetics carry labelling required by the Cosmetics Act.

Article 10(1) of the Cosmetics Act (Act No. 20901, in force 2 April 2026) lists the particulars to be stated on the outer packaging, and subparagraph 10 leaves other matters to be prescribed by Ordinance of the Prime Minister. Article 19(4) of the Enforcement Rule of the Cosmetics Act (Ordinance of the Prime Minister No. 2109, in force 2 April 2026) sets out that list, and its subparagraph 6 is the one that touches this topic. For imported cosmetics, the name of the country of manufacture, the name of the manufacturing company and its address must be stated, with a parenthetical proviso: where the origin under the Foreign Trade Act has been marked, the name of the country of manufacture may be omitted.

That is where the two regimes meet. For imported cosmetics, a country-of-manufacture statement and a Foreign Trade Act origin marking both exist, and marking the latter allows the name element of the former to be omitted. What that proviso does not list as omissible is the manufacturing company's name and address in the same subparagraph. The proviso to the main text of the same paragraph also excludes subparagraphs 1 and 6 in the case of customised cosmetics.

The Cosmetics Act has its own provision for labelling that does not match the facts. Article 13(1)4 prohibits labelling or advertising that is likely to deceive consumers contrary to the facts or cause them to misunderstand. What has to be substantiated, and with what kind of evidence, is set out in what you must be able to prove.

8. What follows false or misleading marking

Article 33-2(1) of the Act allows the Minister of Trade and Industry or a Mayor or Provincial Governor to order a person who has violated Article 33(2) through Article 33(4) to take corrective measures prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as suspension of sale, restoration to the original state, or origin marking.

Article 33-2(2) allows a penalty surcharge of up to 300 million won for violations in the same range, while excluding Article 33(4)4. Article 33-2(5) allows the authority to publish, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, particulars relating to the disposition, such as the violator, the violator's location, the name and item of the goods and the content of the violation, in respect of a person whose penalty surcharge has become final.

There are criminal penalties as well. Article 53-2 of the Act provides for imprisonment of up to five years or a fine of up to 100 million won, which may be imposed concurrently, and its subparagraph 2 covers a trader or seller of goods who violates any subparagraph of Article 33(4), including where it applies mutatis mutandis under Article 35(3). Subparagraph 3 covers a person who violates a corrective order under Article 33-2(1), and subparagraph 4 covers a person who violates the duty under Article 38.

Article 38 reads as follows. No person shall, by forging or altering a certificate of origin, obtaining a certificate of origin with false content, falsely marking the origin on goods or any similar method, disguise goods produced abroad, including goods produced abroad that have undergone in Korea the simple processing prescribed by Presidential Decree, as if their origin were Korea, and export those goods or sell them abroad. The parenthetical phrase matters: goods made abroad that have only undergone simple processing in Korea are included in the foreign goods covered by that prohibition.

9. A determination can be obtained in advance

Sometimes the provisions still leave it unclear where a particular process falls. The Act provides a procedure for that.

Article 34(3) allows a trader, a seller of goods or a similar person to request the Minister of Trade and Industry to determine the origin of export or import goods, and Article 34(4) requires the Minister, on receiving such a request, to make the determination and notify the requester. Article 34(5) allows a person who is dissatisfied with the determination to raise an objection within 30 days of receiving the notice, and Article 34(6) requires the decision on the objection to be notified within 150 days of its receipt.

The procedural detail is in Article 62 of the Decree. Article 62(1) requires the request to specify the item number and item name, including the model name, under the tariff and statistics integrated commodity classification, the grounds for the request, and the origin claimed by the requester, with one sample and any other material necessary for the determination attached; it carries a proviso allowing the sample to be omitted where the nature of the goods makes submission difficult, or where the determination is not hindered by its absence. Article 62(3) requires the determination to be made and notified in writing within 60 days of the request, excluding any period needed to collect materials relating to the determination.

It is worth noticing that the request itself asks for an item number. HS classification is the language of the determination, and the procedure shows it.

10. What to settle in the brief

Origin is not something to decide just before the label goes to print. It is already being decided when the materials and the process are chosen. These are useful questions to work through before development starts.

The answers depend entirely on the development route. The differences between routes are set out in OEM, ODM, private label and brand sourcing, and the duties that stay with the brand even when manufacturing is outsourced are in what the brand owner still has to do.

11. Frequently asked questions

If a Korean company planned and designed the product, can it say Made in Korea?

Planning and design are not among the criteria in Article 61(1) of the Decree. That provision looks at where the goods were obtained or produced, where the substantial transformation occurred, and which country performed only simple processing. Article 76-2(2) of the Regulation does, however, give "Designed in country name" as an example of a supplementary marking placed alongside the origin marking.

If bulk is imported and then filled and packed in Korea, is the product Korean?

The provisions alone do not settle it; whether that operation amounts to substantial transformation has to be assessed. That said, Article 85(8)3 of the Regulation treats activities related to packaging goods for the purpose of sale as simple processing, and Article 85(8)5 states that even where the HS six-digit code changes, the processing in its items remains within the range of simple processing. And for exports, the proviso to Article 56(5) of the Decree directly prohibits marking Korea as the origin where imported goods undergo simple processing in Korea and are then exported.

Does using a large share of imported materials rule out Korean origin?

The fact that materials are imported does not decide the question by itself. Determinations for export and import goods are made under Article 61 of the Decree and Article 85 of the Regulation. The separate criteria in Article 86 of the Regulation, for goods produced and distributed domestically, exclude chapter 33 from their scope in Article 86(1)2, so the 51 per cent and 85 per cent thresholds in Article 86(2) do not apply to cosmetics.

Our imported cosmetic already carries an origin marking. Must the country of manufacture also be stated?

Article 19(4)6 of the Enforcement Rule requires imported cosmetics to state the name of the country of manufacture, the name of the manufacturing company and its address, with a proviso allowing the name of the country of manufacture to be omitted where the origin under the Foreign Trade Act has been marked. What may be omitted is the name of the country of manufacture; the manufacturing company's name and its address are not in that proviso.

If it is Korean origin under Korean criteria, is it Korean origin in the export market too?

That cannot be assumed. Article 61(3) of the Decree provides that where the origin criteria for export goods differ from those of the importing country, origin may be determined according to the importing country's criteria, and the main text of Article 56(5) of the Decree likewise allows marking under the importing country's rules where they differ. The destination market's rules have to be checked against that country's own law.

12. Next steps

Origin is a statement of fact about a process, not a marketing phrase. It is faster to settle it while the materials and the process are being chosen than at the point of drawing up label artwork. Simply remembering that domestic distribution and export sit under different provisions, and that the destination market has different rules again, removes a good deal of rework.

EVAS performs planning, design, research, manufacturing, logistics and brand content in house. To narrow the formula direction first, see the formula library; to see how development is sequenced, see the development process; and to work through the conditions of the product you are planning, tell us through contact. Other articles are in insights.

Sources