The article 44 in The Trade Union Act(The Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act) is generally accepted as the legal ground of the principle of no work no pay. However, the article 44 in The Trade Union Act seems not to have been legislated with full legal consideration and deep debate in 1997. So, this thesis examined the validity and effectiveness of the article 44 in The Trade Union Act. As a result of the examination, I've found that the article 44 in The Trade Union Act doesn't have sufficient validity and effectiveness. To be specific, I've demonstrated the weak points of the grounds(characteristic of bilateral contract, theory of legal risk bearing, theory of labor-management relations suspension, theory of the equality of laboral dispute etc.) of the principle of no work  no pay. Besides, I've confirmed that the principle of no work no pay has no legitimacy in terms of the constitutional law, because it's not consistent with the purpose of the  the right to strike and it's probabe to constrain employees' constitutional right(right to strike). Especially, examined from the standpoint of "the theory of the compensation for the labor-management relation"(a viewpoint, through which perceiving the essencial  nature of wage as 'the compensation for the continuation of labor-management relation'),  it's clear that the article 44 in The Trade Union Act has no validity and effectiveness. So,  I've proposed that "the problem of paying the wage during the strike" should be understood by the theory of the right to protest(the right to refuse to pay the wage during the strike) instead of the principle of no work no pay, because of the logicality. So to speak, I think that it's more rational and logical to accept "the problem of paying the wage during the strike" as an issue of the legal connection in terms of performance of the bilateral contract rather than as an issue of the legal connection  in terms of continuation of the bilateral contract. It's definitely possible, of course, for the employer to pay the (all or portion of) wage during the strike through relinquishing (all or portion of) his own right to protest(the right to refuse to pay the wage during the strike). And according to "the theory of the right to protest(the right to refuse to pay the wage during the strike)", there is no need to worry about the legal problem of unfair profits. In conclusion, I've proposed that the article 44 in The Trade Union Act should be eliminated through the amendment of the law, and suggested that "the problem of paying the wage during the strike" should be left to the labor-management autonomy.