Purpose: This in vitro study evaluated shear bond strengths of surface treatment porcelains with four porcelain repair systems simulating intraoral bonding of composite resin to feldspathic porcelain or pressable porcelain. Material and methods: Eighty Porcelain disks were prepared. Group A: forty disk specimens were fabricated with Feldspathic Porcelain($Omega^{(R)}900$, Vident, Menlo Park, CA, USA). Group B: forty disk specimens were fabricated with Pressable Porcelain(IPS Empress 2 ingot, Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein, Germany). Each groups was divided into 4 subgroups and composite resin cylinders were bonded to specimen with one of the following four systems: Clearfil Porcelain Bond(L. Morita, Tustin, CA, USA), Ulradent Porcelain Etch. (Ultradent, Salt Lake City UT, USA), Porcelain Liner-M(Sun Medical Co., Kyoto, Japan), Cimara Kit(Voco, Germany). After surface conditioning with one of the four porcelain repair systems substrate surfaces of the specimen were examined microscopically(SEM). Shear bond strengths of specimens for each subgroup were determined with a universal testing machine (5mm/min crosshead speed) after storing them in distilled water at $37{pm}1^{circ}C$ for 24 hours. Stress at failure was measured in $MP_a$, and mode of failure was recorded. Differences among four repair systems were analyzed with two way ANOVA and Duncan test at the 95% significance level. Results: In the scanning electron photomicrograph of the treated porcelain surface, hydrofluoric acid etched group appeared the highest roughness. The shear bond strength of the phosphoric acid etched group was not significantly(p>0.05) different between feldspathic porcelain and pressable porcelain. But in no treatment and roughened with a bur group, the shear bond strength of the feldspathic porcelain was significantly higher than that of the pressable porcelain. In hydrofluoric acid etched group, the shear bond strength of the pressable porcelain was significantly higher(p<0.05). Conclusion: 1. Treatment groups showed significantly greater shear bond strengths than no treatment group(p<0.05). 2. Group with more roughened porcelain surface did not always show higher shear bond strengths. 3. In phosphoric acid etched group, there was no significant difference in shear bond strength between feldspathic porcelain and pressable porcelain(p>0.05). However in the other groups, there were significant differences in shear bond strengths between feldspathic porcelain and pressable porcelain(p<0.05).