The structure of sentence like (1a) has been one of the topics of many articles. (1) a. John is easy to please. b. It is easy to please John. This paper aims to examine two conflicting analyses about Tough Constructions: one is that (1a) is a deep structure and the other is that (1b) is a deep structure. This construction includes these adjectives: easy, tough, hard, difficult, impossible, pleasant, convenient etc. ``Tough-Movement`` which was first introduced by Postal (1971), is a transformational rule that raises a deep object in the complement sentence to the surface subject position, while Objection Deletion is another rule which deletes the Equi-NP in the subordinate clause as proposed in Lasnik & Fiengo (1974), Chomsky (1981). In addition, Chomsky (1977) explained this construction as ``Wh-Movement`` and Browning (1987) analysed this construction as the movement of ``null operator``. Historical approach supports this view: ``Tough Movement`` in Old English was NP Movement but in Middle English (from 1400 years) this structure was changed from NP Movement to Null Operator Movement owing to losses of some Cases. Finally, I introduced Contreras (1989)``s analysis by ``revised strong crossover``. From this, I have drawn that the analysis that the subject NP of Tough Construction originally existed is much better than that the subject NP was derived by NP Movement.