Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the ovarian dose during radiation therapy for breast cancer in women of childbearing age through an experiment. The ovarian dose is evaluated by comparing and analyzing between the calculated dose in the treatment planning system according to the treatment technique and the measured dose using a thermoluminescence dosimeter (TLD). The clinical usefulness of lead (Pb) apron is investigated through dose analysis according to whether or not it is used. Materials and Methods: Rando humanoid phantom was used for measurement, and wedge filter radiation therapy, 3D conformal radiation therapy, and intensity modulated radiation therapy were used as treatment techniques. A treatment plan was established so that 95% of the prescribed dose could be delivered to the right breast of the Rando humanoid phantom 3D image obtained using the CT simulator. TLD was inserted into the surface and depth of the virtual ovary of the Rando hunmanoid phantom and irradiated with radiation. The measurement location was the center of treatment and the point moved 2 cm to the opposite breast from the center of the Rando hunmanoid phantom, 5cm, 10cm, 12.5cm, 15cm, 17.5cm, 20cm from the boundary of the right breast to the center of treatment and downward, and the surface and depth of the right ovary. Measurements were made at a total of 9 central points. In the dose comparison of treatment planning systems, two wedge filter treatment techniques, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, and intensity-modulated radiation therapy were established and compared. Treatments were compared, and dose measurements according to the use of lead apron were compared and analyzed in intensity-modulated radiation therapy. The measured value was calculated by averaging three TLD values for each point and converting using the TLD calibration value, which was calculated as the point dose mean value. In order to compare the treatment plan value with the actual measured value, the absolute dose value was measured and compared at each point (%Diff). Results: At Point A, the center of treatment, a maximum of 201.7cGy was obtained in the treatment planning system, and a maximum of 200.6cGy was obtained in the TLD. In all treatment planning systems, 0cGy was calculated from Point G, which is a point 17.5cm downward from the breast interface. As a result of TLD, a maximum of 2.6cGy was obtained at Point G, and a maximum of 0.9cGy was obtained at Point J, which is the ovarian dose, and the absolute dose was 0.3%~1.3%. The difference in dose according to the use of lead aprons was from a maximum of 2.1cGy to a minimum of 0.1cGy, and the %Diff value was 0.1%~1.1%. Conclusion: In the treatment planning system, the difference in dose according to the three treatment plans did not show a significant difference from 0.85% to 2.45%. In the ovary, the difference between the Rando humanoid phantom's treatment planning system and the actual measured dose was within 0.9%, and the actual measured dose was slightly higher. This did not accurately reflect the effect of scattered radiation in the treatment planning system, and it is thought that the dose of scattered radiation and the dose taken by CBCT with TLD inserted were reflected in the actual measurement. In dosimetry according to the with or without a lead apron, when a lead apron was used, the closer the distance from the treatment range, the more effective the shielding was. Although it is not clinically appropriate for pregnancy or artificial insemination during radiotherapy, the dose irradiated to the ovaries during treatment is not expected to significantly affect the reproductive function of women of childbearing age after radiotherapy. However, since women of childbearing age have constant anxiety, it is thought that psychological stability can be promoted by presenting the data from this study.