The purpose of this study is to obtain brain MRI images through Heavenly T2 FLAIR and DWI techniques to find out strengths and weaknesses of each image. Data were analyzed on 13 normal people and 17 brain tumor patients. Philips Ingenia 3.0TCX was used as the equipment used for the inspection, and 32 Channel Head Coil was used to acquire data. Using Image J and Infinity PACS Data, 3mm2 of gray matter, white matter, cerebellum, basal ganglia, and tumor areas were set and measured. Quantitative analysis measured SNR and CNR as an analysis method, and qualitative analysis evaluated overall image quality, lesion conspicuity, image distortion, susceptibility artifact and ghost artifact on a 5-point scale. The statistical significance of data analysis was that Wilcox-on Signed Rank Test and Paired t-test were executed, and the statistical program used was SPSS ver.22.0 and the p value was less than 0.05. In quantitative analysis, the SNR of gray matter, white matter, cerebellum, basal ganglia, and tumor of Heavily T2 FLAIR is 41.45±0.13, 40.52±0.45, 41.44±0.51, 40.96±0.09, 35.28±0.46 and the CNR is 15.24±0.13, 16.75±0.23, 16.28±0.41, 15.83±0.17, 16.63±0.51. In DWI, SNR is 32.58±0.22, 36.75±0.17, 30.21±0.19, 35.83±0.11, 43.29±0.08, and CNR is 13.14±0.63, 14.21±0.31, 12.95±0.32, 11.73±0.09, 17.56±0.52. In normal tissues, Heavenly T2 FLAIR obtained high results, but in disease evaluation, high results were obtained at DWI, b=1000 (p<0.05). In addition, in the qualitative analysis, overall image quality, lesion conspicuity, image distortion, susceptibility artifact and ghost artifact aspects of the Heavily T2 FLAIR were evaluated, and 3.75±0.28, 2.29±0.24, 3.86±0.23, 4.08±0.21, 3.79±0.22 values were found, respectively, and 2.53±0.39, 4.13±0.29, 1.90±0.20, 1.81±0.21, 1.52±0.45 in DWI. As a result of qualitative analysis, overall image quality, image distortion, susceptibility artifact and ghost artifact were rated higher than DWI. However, DWI was evaluated higher in lesion conspicuity (p<0.05). In normal tissues, the level of Heavenly T2 FLAIR was higher, but the DWI technique was higher in the evaluation of the disease (tumor). The two results were necessary techniques depending on the normal site and the location of the disease. In conclusion, statistically significant results were obtained from the two techniques. In quantitative and qualitative analysis, the two techniques had advantages and disadvantages, and in normal and disease evaluation, the two techniques produced useful results. These results are believed to be educational data for clinical basic evaluation and MRI in the future.