미국의 불심검문 판례동향에 관한 연구

The police law in the U.S. do not have same married codes of laws. What is representative as the police law of the U.S. is ' Stop and Frisk'. Among enforcements of the police law, particularly what could be discussed comparing with the U.S. is 'Stop and Frisk' of the Fourth Amendment of the police official enforcement law. Therefore, this study insighted into 'Stop and Frisk' the Supreme Court's in the United States. With a different law system each other, the two nations also don't have same grounds on law enforcement. They depend on where grounds place on. The stop and frisk of the U.S Police consists a major part as an law enforcement of the police. It was not admitted before the Terry case because it violated the fourth Amendment of the Federal Constitution. But since the Terry case the federal supreme court have began to admit the stop and frisk, and its attitude have brought about many changes. Especially, a court of justice usually has a power to decide 'Stop and Frisk' according to a period and society of a country. The Supreme court of the U.S. has the last word on 'Stop and Frisk', so it considers the enforcements of the police as being fair, or it restraints them. the judges of the Supreme Court have showed active attitudes in accordance with transforming era, while courts perform inactive judgment within the minimum category and the police enforce their officials by using those judges as a consented admission that is limitative, rather than using them as their legal basis. Thus, judgment made by law courts of South Korea are not similar with those of the U.S. because law courts in South Korea have only a right to decide whether present law enforcement is legal or illegal. They uncover inactive and limited attitudes. Supreme court's law enforcement must be done to protect basic rights of the people.