For the analysis of mercury in blood and urine, many literatures have been reffered and many kinds of reducing agents for mercury reduction and many acids for pretreatmr are known to be varied. $So HNO_{3}$ and $H_{2}SO_{4}$ among acids and $SnCl_{2}$ and $NaBH_{4}$ as a reducing agent being chosen for the establishment of more efficient and less erroneous analysis, and comparing the absorbance by using vapor generator, the results are followings. 1. The difference of absorbance from concentration of $HNO_{3}$ and $H_{2} SO_{4}$ was not nearly found when mercury reduced by $NaBH_{4}$ after pretreatment. But for more precise analysis, conc acid treatment need to be used. 2. Higher absorbance was shown by using conto acid treatment (P<0.005) when mercury reduced by $NaBH_{4}$ after treating acid primer. And sample which has 99.5% reliability in T-test, treated by conc $H_{2}SO_{4}$(P<0.005) was shown higher absorbance than treat by CORC $HNO_{3}$. 3. The difference of absorbance was not in the slightest in higher 0.1 w/v% $NaBH_{4}$ proved by uruskal-wallis H-Test 4. Some difference of absorbance in $SnCl_{2}$(P<0.005) having 99.5% reliability was found but there was no difference in these 20 w/v% , 25 w/v% and 30 w/v% SnCl$_{2}$ by the experiment of T-test. 5. According to these test results, organic materials were much affect the absorballce when reducing mercury by using $SnCl_{2}$ rather than by $NaBH_{4}$. For bio sample which is contained various organic substances, reduclng agent $NaBH_{4}$ is a lot more efficient to reduce the error then $SnCl_{2}$. 6. analytic method for this study is as following. 7. As the recovery test was done by this, the rate of recovery was shown form 94% to 100.7% .