This study evaluated the microleakage performance of four self-etcing primer adhesives(Clearfil SE Bond, Clearfil Liner Bond 2, UniFil Bond, and FL Bond) and one self-etching adhesive(Prompt L-Pop). Class V cavity preparations with occlusal margins in enamel and gingival margins in dentin were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of 50 extracted human molar teeth. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into five groups and restored using one of five adhesives and composite resins: Prompt L-Pop/Filtek Z 250(Group 1), Clearfil SE Bond/Clearfil AP-X(Group 2), Clearfil Liner Bond 2/Clearfil AP-X(Group 3), UniFil Bond/UniFil F(Group 4), and FL Bond/Filtek Z 250(Group 5). Following one day storage in room temperature water, the restored teeth were thermocycled for 500 cycles between 5$^{circ}C$ and 55$^{circ}C$. Marginal microleakage was assessed by dye penetration using 2% methylene blue dye. After 24 hours, the teeth were sectioned longitudinally and evaluated for microleakage under steromicroscope The data were statistically analysed by Kruskal-Wallis Test, Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed ranked tests. The results of this study were as follows ; 1. The microleakges at both enamel and dentinal mal$.$gins were the lowest in group 4. increasing among groups in the following order: group 2, follwed by group 5, follwed by group 1, and the highest in group 3. 2. At the enamel margins, the microleakage of group 3 was significantly higher than those of groups 2. 4 and 5(p<0.05), and also the microleakage of group 1 was statistically higher than those of groups 2 and 5(p<0.05). 3. At the dentinal margins, microleakage of group 3 was signincantly higher than microleakages of groups 1, 2, 4 and 5(p<0.05). 4. Compared with microleakages between the enamel and dentinal margins of each group, groups 1, 4 and 5 at enamel margin and group 2 and group 3 at dentinal margin were higher microleakage. But there was no significant difference between enamel and dentinal microleakages of each group(p>0.05).