Structural concrete design codes provide several specifications for the minimum reinforcement. For flexural reinforced concrete members, three types of provisions are considered in a design process. First, minimum flexural reinforcement criteria are specified to ensure structure’s ductile behavior. Second, provisions for preventing excessive cracks induced by shrinkage and temperature changes are specified in most design codes. Also, there are provisions to control a crack width in a service limit state. The above each provision is defined according to a different basis and provides different required reinforcement amount. This paper investigates these minimum reinforcement criteria of Korea Structural Concrete Design Code 2012, Korean Highway Bridge Design Code (Limit State Design), ACI 318: Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structure. The basis of the minimum reinforcement criteria in each design code was examined and compared with each other in terms of reinforcement amount for rectangular and T-shaped singly reinforced concrete sections. The study concludes that there is an issue between the minimum reinforcement provision for ensuring ductile behavior and that for crack control in the service limit state specified in the Korean Highway Bridge Design Code. In typical sections, minimum reinforcement areas for ductile behavior were always larger than those for crack control.