\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Ref.** & **Authors** & **Location** & **Building Type** & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Building Total** \\ **Floor Area** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Economizer** \\ **Control Method** \\ \end{tabular} & **MLSP** \\ \hline
[16] & \begin{tabular}{c} [PERSON] \\ et al. \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Rockhampton, \\ Australia \\ \end{tabular} & Office &
\begin{tabular}{c} Medium \\ (4263 m\({}^{2}\)) \\ \end{tabular} & N/A & N/A \\
[17] & \begin{tabular}{c} [PERSON] et al. \\ \end{tabular} & 17 regions in Canada 1 & Residential & \begin{tabular}{c} Small \\ (193 m\({}^{2}\)) \\ \end{tabular} & Fixed & N/A \\  & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Stockholm, Sweden; \\ Dubai, UAE \\ San Francisco, US; \\ Singapore \\ \end{tabular} & Datacenter &
\begin{tabular}{c} Small \\ (12 m\({}^{2}\)) \\ \end{tabular} & Fixed & 24 \({}^{\circ}\)C \\
[19] & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Wang and Song \\ \end{tabular} & Atlanta, US & Commercial &
\begin{tabular}{c} Small \\ (214 m\({}^{2}\)) \\ \end{tabular} & Differential & N/A \\
[20] & \
\begin{tabular}{c} [PERSON] et al. \\ \end{tabular} & 8 regions in China 2 & Container farm &
\begin{tabular}{c} Small \\ (15 m\({}^{2}\)) \\ \end{tabular} & Fixed & N/A \\
[21] & \begin{tabular}{c} Seong and Hong \\ \end{tabular} & Donghae, South Korea & Education & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Large \\ (9927 m\({}^{2}\)) \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} Fixed and \\ Differential \\ \end{tabular} & 22 \({}^{\circ}\)C \\
[22] & \begin{tabular}{c} [PERSON] et al. \\ \end{tabular} & Daejeon, South Korea & Office & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Large \\ (6164 m\({}^{2}\)) \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} Fixed and \\ Differential \\ \end{tabular} & 24 \({}^{\circ}\)C and 28 \({}^{\circ}\)C \\
[23] & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Yao and Wang \\ \end{tabular} & 6 regions in China 3 & Office &
\begin{tabular}{c} Medium \\ (4646 m\({}^{2}\)) \\ \end{tabular} & Differential & N/A \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Literature review of economizer control. Previous studies have primarily focused on economizer control implementation to achieve energy savings. These studies analyzed cooling energy consumption with and without economizers, using various control methods. The following issues from the literature review must be considered:  
* Economizer control methods: Economizer controls have conventionally utilized fixed control for small buildings and differential control for medium and large buildings. * Limitations in MLSP determination: Previous research has often overlooked the impact of MLSP on cooling systems. Instead, many studies have utilized the MLSP specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 [16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25]. * Limitations in system performance analysis based on MLSP determination: Evaluations of the indoor thermal environment (e.g., dry-bulb temperature and humidity) and cooling energy performance (including OA intakes, air conditions in AHUs, and dehumidification) have not adequately addressed variations in MLSP [21, 22]. The MLSP establishes the baseline for determining OA intake rates based on OA conditions. Thus, determining an appropriate MLSP is crucial, taking into account the specific OA conditions. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 specifies MLSP according to OA conditions in the U.S. [26, 27]. However, OA conditions in the U.S. differ significantly from those in South Korea, which experiences four distinct seasons with varying humidity levels. Applying the MLSP from ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 to economizer controls in South Korea's cooling systems can lead to increased, unnecessary cooling energy consumption. This increased consumption arises from inappropriate MLSP settings that result in OA intake during suboptimal conditions and rejection during optimal conditions, as well as the intake of high-humidity air, which increases cooling energy consumption owing to the need for dehumidification [28]. Accordingly, determining the MLSP under the Korean climate is necessary to optimize economizer control.