In my opinion if any other countries such as Burma, Thailand, the Philippines, etc., repacked this ammunition it would be labeled in their language. why would any country (official sources) try to replicate some sort of Japanese language label?
Also, the Mum is a sacred symbol, or was at that time (probably still is, but I don’t know that) to the Japanese and was not used lightly. It identified the rifle as property of the IMperial Japanese Government and gave honor to it, so much so, that MacArthur agreed to allow the defacing of the mum on rifles taken as souvenirs at the end of the war, to avoid more “dishonor” to the Japanese.
While most Koreans spoke or had some familiarity with Japanese at the period of the Korean War, I don’t see them replicating a package for the use of their troops in Japanese Arms, in the Japanese language. With their new found freedom after WWII from 40 years of Japanese oppression, there was no love for the Japanese in Korea, and this just would not make any sense at all, in my mind.
I suspect that it is either a replica box made purely for reasons of sale (some would call it a fake), or an original box of a pattern not seen often. I have never seen such a box style for any caliber of ammunition from Japan, nor is any pictured in Ken Elk’s book or any other source in my library.
Regarding secrecy, Japanese box labels well known to students coninued to display the Arsenal Mark, not the Imperial Symbol of the Cherry Blossom, until very, very late in 1945. Some Navy box labels appear not to have an arsenal mark at all, but there is no substitution using the Imperial symbol.
There is zero evidence of any over-all attempt to sterilize ammunition packaging as to the Arsenal Symbol during the war, right to the end. It is quite possible that the symbols for the arsenals themselves were military secrets - that is, the meaning of each particular symbol, but I don’t know that myself. Bear in mind, by the way, that the United States, a major player in WWII of course, headstamped and packaged ammunition with the initials or the name of the company that produced it. the Germans chose the secrecy route for military equipment to be used outside of the borders of Germany with a coding system, while police items for use in Germany were marked, until at least late in the war, with the full commercial names of the makers. Not every country reacted to the secrecy querstion at the same level.
No one has addressed the marking in the Western alphabet of “Arisaka 7.7 etc.” in red, except to say that it is a typewriter font, with which I agree, and therefore would have to have been applied before the cartridges were wrapped, or they would have had to have been unwrapped, the notation added, and rewrapped. The use of the Western alphabet and the name “Arisaka” in this fashion would be unprecedented on Japanese ammuniton labels as far as I know. Arisaka’s name was not part of the Official Designation of either the rifles or the ammunition, to my knowledge.
This part of the label makes no sense at all in the cntext of original Japanese ammunition.
I am not willing to rule out originality, despite the nonsensical quantity of seven rounds in the package, for a five-round rifle, but my strongest feeling is still that this package is, kindly said, a replica.