Abstract—The study of decision possibility of building owner and constructor using game theory showed that in case of one-time playing game, both of players would choose to construct normal building because of its prominent strategy as it provided more result than green building construction, so there was no co-operation between both players. The results found that Case 1: Fiscal policy was not required to interfere. Building owner would construct green building or repaired to be a green building when supplement income from green building and discount of maintenance were more than result that supplement expense from green building construction. Constructor would construct green building when supplement income construction was more than supplement material cost. Case 2: government section enforced a measure to interfere building owner when supplement expense from green building construction was higher than sum amount of supplement rental cost and maintenance discount Case 3: The government section enforced a fiscal measure to interfere constructor when supplement cost from construction was higher than constructor supplement income. This game relied on cooperation from both sides. It would be the highest result. If both did not co-operate and only focused own self benefit, they could not construct a green building. Owner and constructor chose normal building to be a main strategy because there was more benefit. If we wanted to then to choose green building construction, we should add returns to owner and constructor more that supplement and material cost from green building construction. To analyze game model found that when we processed under freedom market ideal, it will not bring green building construction. The government is responsible for using tools for marketing to construct green building following it needed. Tools which will be useful are economic tool including tax, social tool including education and technical tools including law, regulations and examination which always being improved.