Core Pacific City
shopping center in Taipei, Taiwan
Core Pacific City, also known as the Living Mall (Chinese: 京華城; pinyin: Jīnghuá chéng), was a shopping center in Songshan District, Taipei, Taiwan, that opened in 2001 and closed in 2019.
History
Core Pacific City was built in 2001. During its development and construction, it was touted as the world's first truly 24-hour mall and Asia's first "city within a city" complex.
Before it opened, its management was fined by the Taipei City Government for failing fire safety inspections. Further fines were levied when the mall opened to the public without first obtaining an operating license. In February 2002, a fire at the mall required the evacuation of 20,000 people. It was determined to be arson, and in July 2002, former Core Pacific official Lin Chang-cheng (林長成) was convicted of the crime, along with two others, Wang Lin-kwun (王林坤) and Lin Ching-chi (林清吉). Losses were estimated at NT$12 million. The opening of Taipei 101's mall in 2003 was expected to affect the revenues of Core Pacific's tenants, though less severely than those at other malls, due to Core Pacific's lower price points. In 2004, the mall's management company was cited by Taiwan's Fair Trade Commission for unfair trade practices relating to a gift certificate promotion campaign.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Core Pacific City” is shopping center in Taipei, Taiwan. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Core, Pacific and City, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “shopping center in Taipei, Taiwan” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 6, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q700061. Authority coordinates are 25.048, 121.562. 3 of 3 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2001, 2019, 2002 and 2003.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Core Pacific City”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Core Pacific City primary sources, Core Pacific City archive and Core research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Core Pacific City”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Core Pacific City” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.