이 연구에서는 20세기 전반부터 현재에 이르기까지 미국 연방대법원의 판례에 대하여 각각 사건의 개요와 판결 및 그 판결에 대한 이유 등을 년대적인 순서에 따라 서술하였다. 그리고 앞에서 언급한 연방대법원의 판례에서 보상이 필요 없는 단순한 규제(regulation)와 반드시 보상을 요하는 수용(expropriation)과의 구별기준이 무엇인지를 살펴보고, 그 구별기준이 시대적으로 어떻게 변화하여 왔으며, 또한 판례에서 나타난 비슷한 형태의 구별기준별로 각각의 사건을 분류해 보았다.이 연구에 의하면 수용여부에 대한 연방대법원의 판단기준은 1800년대 후반에서 1900년대 초에는 규제목적에 초점을 둔 목적에 의한 심사였으며, 1900년대 전반에는 가치감소원칙(diminution of value rule)에 기초를 둔 정도심사(재산적 가치의 정도)가 주요 판단기준이 되었고, 그 후에는 규제목적과 규제가 초래하는 경제적 손실 즉 목적심사와 정도심사(재산적 가치의 정도)의 비교형량에 의해 결정되었다. 그러나 1980년대 전반에는 연방대법원이 수용여부의 판단에 대하여 본안심리를 거부하여 오다가 1987년의 First English Case를 계기로 수용문제에 대해 적극적인 심리를 하게 되었다. 그리고 1980년의 Agins사건에서 보여준 수용여부에 대한 구별기준을 근거로 1980년대 후반에서 최근까지 수용여부에 대한 구별기준으로 주 이익의 실질적 증진(substantially advance)여부와 경제적 사용의 전면적 부정여부에 의하여 수용여부가 결정 되어왔으며, 그 밖의 경우에는 여전히 종래의 비교형량기준(balancing test)에 따라 수용여부를 결정하는 경향이 최근 연방대법원의 기본적인 입장이라고 생각한다.

A Study on the standard and the change about land use regulation in U.S.- On the basis of leading case -攀* Lecturer, College of law, Kunsan National University攀攀Lee, Dong-Chan* A Study on the standard and the change about land use regulation in U.S. - On the basis of leading case - Lee, Dong-Chan* This article explains leading cases in the U.S. about land use regulations from the second half of the 19th century to the present time. and describes the standard of the distinction between expropriation and regulation and the change of that. First, the standard of the distinction was focused on the purpose of regulation from the second half of the 19th century to the early 20th century and the diminution of value rule in the first half of the 20th century. Second, it was determined by balance, economical loss caused by regulation and purpose of regulation. Third, it was decided by the three factors as following in 1978's Penn Central case. (1) the character of the governmental action or regulation; (2) the economic impact of the regulation on the claimant; and (3) the extent to which the regulation has interfered with reasonable investment-backed expectations. There are two discrete categories of regulatory action that are compensable without case-specific inquiry into the public interest advanced in support of the restraint. Finally, On the basis of the above three factors, the standard of the distinction in 1980's Agins case was determined by whether substantial advance for the state interest is or not and whether all economically viable use is permitted or not. and in the extra cases, it was still decided by the balancing test. This standard of the distinction has been applied until the present.

A Study on the standard and the change about land use regulation in U.S.- On the basis of leading case -攀* Lecturer, College of law, Kunsan National University攀攀Lee, Dong-Chan* A Study on the standard and the change about land use regulation in U.S. - On the basis of leading case - Lee, Dong-Chan* This article explains leading cases in the U.S. about land use regulations from the second half of the 19th century to the present time. and describes the standard of the distinction between expropriation and regulation and the change of that. First, the standard of the distinction was focused on the purpose of regulation from the second half of the 19th century to the early 20th century and the diminution of value rule in the first half of the 20th century. Second, it was determined by balance, economical loss caused by regulation and purpose of regulation. Third, it was decided by the three factors as following in 1978's Penn Central case. (1) the character of the governmental action or regulation; (2) the economic impact of the regulation on the claimant; and (3) the extent to which the regulation has interfered with reasonable investment-backed expectations. There are two discrete categories of regulatory action that are compensable without case-specific inquiry into the public interest advanced in support of the restraint. Finally, On the basis of the above three factors, the standard of the distinction in 1980's Agins case was determined by whether substantial advance for the state interest is or not and whether all economically viable use is permitted or not. and in the extra cases, it was still decided by the balancing test. This standard of the distinction has been applied until the present.

regulation, expropriation, regulatory takings, land use regulation, standard of distinction