This paper asks the question: what choice of environmental policy instruments is efficient to reduce sulfur dioxide from stationary sourcesulcorner: In Korea, command and control has been a common way of controlling $SO_2-emissions.$ When compared to the non-incentive environmental policy instrument such as command and control, economic incentive environmental policy instrument has been the advantage of making polluter himself flexibly deals with in marginal abatement cost to develop environmental technology in the long view. Therefore, the application possibility of the incentive environmental policy instrument was studied in this research to realize the countermeasure for controlling of $SO_2-emissions.$ As a result, enforcement of the countermeasure such as flue gas desulfurizer by command and control would be suitable because power generation is performed by the public or for the public in source of air pollution and thus, economic principle is not applied to the polluter. In the source of industrial pollution, enforcement of fuel tax is found to be suitable for the countermeasure for the use of low sulfur oil in terms of the flexibility of demand for the price in the long tenn. For the permissible air pollution standards applicable to all air pollutant emitting facilities, enforcement of incentive environmental policy such as bubble, off-set, banking policy or tradeable emission penn its would be ideal in long terms according to the regional characteristics and the number and scale of air pollutant emitting facilities.