The clinic was very professional from start to finish. Doctor Jung was excellent and gentle with the treatment. I felt well looked after and everyone was outstanding. Happy with my service!

One audited Dear case sits further down this page. Everything above and below it is about a problem specific to this material: Juvelook puts two substances into the same skin, they work on two different timetables, and a single photograph cannot tell you which one you are looking at.
Which means the date written beside each frame is doing more work here than in almost any other injectable comparison. A pair shot ten days apart is largely a portrait of the carrier and of the skin recovering from having been injected. A pair with a long gap between the frames is the only one in which the stimulated part of the material has had any opportunity to appear.
The material itself, where it is placed and how a dose is decided are set out on the Juvelook treatment page, and the wider injectable shelf sits on the skin booster category page. This page stays on one question: what a pair of Juvelook photographs is entitled to claim.
Separate them and the photographs become readable. Leave them mixed and any pair can be made to prove anything.
Juvelook arrives suspended in an HA vehicle. Hyaluronic acid binds water, so the field looks fuller and smoother almost at once. That part of the picture is genuine, it is also temporary, and it is what most early Juvelook galleries are actually showing.
Poly-D,L-lactic acid is a biostimulator. It does nothing on the day. The tissue responds to its presence over a long stretch, and whatever comes of that is what a late frame is for. An early photograph has not waited long enough to say anything about this half of the vial.
Pinpoint entry marks, small raised deposits that have not dispersed, bruising where a vessel was crossed and general puffiness across the field all read as change in a close frame. None of them are the material working. They are the needle, and they resolve on their own schedule.
Three processes, one field, one camera. A caption that names only the material has quietly assigned all three to the same cause. The indexed work on lactic-acid biostimulators listed at the foot of this page is largely about the second clock, and one of the entries exists specifically to compare the early volume behaviour of the L-form with that of the D,L-form.
All four want the same treatment in front of a lens: bare skin in both frames, the same flat source of light, the same lens at the same distance, and no beauty processing on the phone. Change any one of those and the pair has stopped being about Juvelook.
Each of these belongs to a different tissue layer or a different treatment. Where a Juvelook caption claims one, the credit has been taken from something else in the file.
Take the second photograph in the first days and you have documented the carrier plus the aftermath of the needle. Take it once the entry marks have gone and the deposits have evened out, and the carrier is already receding while the stimulated component has barely started. Take it much later and the carrier is no longer part of the picture at all, so whatever remains is the part of the result the tissue built for itself.
Three intervals, three different and equally true answers to the same question. That is the specific reason a Juvelook gallery carrying no dates cannot be interpreted at all, and the reason the review appointment at Dear is booked on the day of the injection.
No month figure is published here. How long any individual holds a result varies with age, skin thickness, sun history, the depth the material was placed at, how much was placed and what else is being done to the same field. Your director gives you a conservative date for the comparison frame at the appointment, and gives you the range they expect in your case with the capture on screen. A clinic that quotes a number to you over a message has not examined your skin.
Unretouched, treated at Dear Clinic, published with written consent. Individual results vary.

This photo is an unretouched before/after case of the same person under the same conditions, treated at Dear Clinic and shown with consent. Individual results may vary; no specific outcome is implied or promised.
One case, published deliberately. The Juvelook archive held here is larger, and most of it stays in the patient file because a frame is only published when consent and a caption that survives the standard set out above travel together.
Quoted by the cubic centimetre, in KRW with an approximate dollar figure beside it, and identical whichever passport is on the file.
| Published line | Quoted in | What a comparison of it can reasonably be asked | Listed rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Juvelook — skin and volume lines | 1 cc | Surface grain, the behaviour of light over the field, and fine lines in thin skin. Because part of the effect is collagen-driven, a frame worth publishing is a late one | ₩100,000 (≈ $70) |
| Juvelook Volume — specialty area | 1 cc | The same material quoted at the specialty-area rate for the zones it is designated for. A pair showing it somewhere outside those zones is mislabelled | ₩200,000 (≈ $145) |
Each line is quoted per cubic centimetre. How much a given field takes is settled at the review with the capture on screen, and anything beyond the line you booked is quoted to you before a vial is opened. No course length and no session count is promised in advance on this page. Other materials on the same trolley, including the ones a Juvelook result is most often confused with, are on the booster rate page and the full published price list.
EVE Muse captures the face in 3D under five light sources with AI analysis before a vial is chosen, and the texture, moisture and fine-line scores go on file. The later comparison is made against those figures with the doctor present. A phone photograph from three months ago is not a baseline.
Every booster family on the rate card is stocked here, so the answer to a skin-quality complaint can be a different vial or no vial at all. Where the reading is laxity or lost volume we do not recommend a Juvelook course, and the reason is given at the consultation.
Placed too superficially, a deposit of this material shows as a palpable bump. Placed too deep, it does nothing for the surface the photograph is about. Your injection is director-performed, and the doctor who set the depth is the one who has to read the later frame against the capture.


A comparison that shows only the upside has been edited before it reached you.
Comfort measures during an injected session are confirmed at your consultation and are set to the material and to you. Tell your director about bleeding disorders, blood-thinning medication, previous injectable treatment in the same field, autoimmune conditions, pregnancy and breastfeeding.
Director-performed treatment is a Dear promise — your procedure is planned and performed by the doctors below.





Real verified reviews from our Google Business Profile.
4.9★★★★★ 310 Google ReviewsThe clinic was very professional from start to finish. Doctor Jung was excellent and gentle with the treatment. I felt well looked after and everyone was outstanding. Happy with my service!
I've visited clinic for LDM procedure. I don't speak Korean, so there was an interpreter who assisted me while consulting. The staff was very attentive, they asked me every time before applying products/covering my face during the procedure and it went smoothly. Planning to visit the clini…
All the staff are kind, the doctor is professional. They recommended us the treatment that fit us best and last the longest. A very nice experience overall.
I did a hydrofacial, white/black head removal, and 1 day lasers. Really kind staff and reasonable prices. The only thing I would advise is that your first consultation is with a salesperson and you don’t see the doctor until after you decide what you want and after you pay.
Had a great experience here as a foreigner! The doctors and staff were knowledgeable, friendly, and not pushy. They made recommendations in my consultation and were happy to work within my budget.
Tell us what you are seeing in your skin and where. Answered in English as soon as possible.
Four indexed entries are listed below: a 2005 paper and a 2011 paper on facial volumetric correction with injectable poly-l-lactic acid, a 2022 comparison of early-stage volume behaviour between the L-form and the D,L-form, and a 2024 clinical histology study of biostimulatory activity over time.
Each is given as title, journal and year with a verifiable DOI. No outcome figure from any of them is reproduced here, and none of them is evidence of a result in your own skin.
References are provided for information — outcomes vary by individual and are assessed at your diagnosis.