PibooAll postsIngredients
Englishko

아이디플라코스메틱

아이디플라코스메틱 EXO-V Plus Ampoule

Ingredient analysis and how the ad lines read

Product photo of 아이디플라코스메틱 EXO-V Plus Ampoule

Read on 2026-09-08

What is this product?

Buy this 30 mL ampoule for the depth of its anti-aging construction, and only if you tolerate fragrance: the label declares 향료 as the last of 74 entries, with ethanol just above it. What the ingredient record actually supports is unusual list depth rather than proven potency: nine peptides, eight hyaluronate forms, four collagen entries, niacinamide fourth from the top and a Lactobacillus extracellular vesicle fifth, and not one percentage published for any of them. The retailer's mandatory disclosure confirms a functional cosmetic filing was completed but does not say which function, so no specific efficacy category attaches to it. Skip it if you screen for fragrance or want a dose you can verify.

What makes it different?

Most ampoules at this ambition level publish one number to argue with. This one publishes none, and instead argues by list length: 74 declared entries, nine of them peptides and eight of them hyaluronate forms, with the exosome class ingredient placed fifth. Two practical consequences follow. It is fragranced and it carries ethanol, which rules it out for anyone screening for either. And it ships as a two part product that the label says to shake before use, so the handling is different from a single phase ampoule even though nothing collected establishes what the container looks like.

What is in it?

The full ingredient list as the brand publishes it, in the printed order. Each name links to what we know about that ingredient.

This brand publishes its ingredient list in Korean only. Names below are the matching INCI names from the Korean Cosmetic Association ingredient dictionary, except 10 with no dictionary entry, left in Korean.

Key ingredientWorth a closer look

Ingredients with no mark are ones we found nothing notable about, and when marks overlap on one ingredient we show the caution first.

We could not place these in the list above: 드럼스틱씨오일, 호호바씨오일, 당호박씨오일, 카프릴릭/카프릭트라이글리세라이드, 하이드로제네이티드레시틴, 폴리글리세릴-10다이아이소스테아레이트

Did the ad claims hold up?

We checked 3 lines this product advertises against the ingredient list and public documents. One of them holds up. The rest are only partly right or have nothing behind them.

Claims translated from Korean, originals preserved.

backed by evidence1

  • Completed functional cosmetics examination (or reporting) in accordance with the Cosmetics Act.
    Korean original

    화장품법에 따른 기능성 화장품 심사(또는 보고)를 필함

likely, not proven1

  • Exo-V Plus Ampoule
    Korean original

    엑소브이 플러스 앰플

says nothing1

  • [Seumusal Ampoule]
    Korean original

    [스무살 앰플]

Each line is quoted as the brand published it, and each one was read on its own against the ingredient list and the documents the brand publishes.

How we read these lines

What else is worth seeing?

Products we read alongside this one.