This study investigates Kundoku in Senjimon of the Nanboku-cho period through Senjimonkochu possessed by National Archives of Japan, previous Naikakubunko. There are 2 survey methods, in focus of genealogy of text and glossed annotations or vernacular reading. The former is classifies by difference, e.g. existence of Li Xian`s preface and annotations in Japanese Senjimon. As a result, Senjimon text may be classified by Uenobon, Todaibon, Tanimurabon, Naikakubunkobon=Toyobunkobon. Moreover this classification is well substantiated through Pi Hui(naming taboo) of Chinese character in Senjimon. In the latter, the paper argues that characteristic of Naikakubunkobon is annotated by result of personal studing, not based by the original book. And there are many difference between Naikakubunkobon and Toyobunkobon despite of a few of sampling. These examples present that Kundoku in the Nanboku-cho period was not stylized yet, and it was allowed independent method of Kundoku in Senjimon different with orthodox scripture like the Analects. Finally this paper compares with Naikakubunkobon and the different parts between Uenobon and Todaibon. As a result, many examples of word order are same with Todaibon, like a case of Tanimurabon which is refered to Oh(2015A). However not only it is high rate in self-sufficient words are succeed from Uenobon, but also there are more than twice of examples are not matched with Uenobon and Todaibon. As above, it is difficult to explain that Kundoku of Naikakubunkobon inherited or was corrected by Kundoku of Uenobon, and therefore it may explain that the learner annotated independently and freely Kundoku of Senjimon in the Nanboku-cho period.