Former President Donald Trump and New York Attorney General Letitia James, in separate media appearances, addressed the ruling Friday evening, trading barbs while reacting to the judgment.

Speaking from his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, Trump said he had to pay a fine for "having built a perfect company." Accusing both James and Judge Arthur Engoron of being politically motivated, Trump denied committing any fraud and said he plans to appeal.

Meanwhile, in New York, James lauded the ruling as a victory for all Americans and the principles of equal justice under the law -- saying "former presidents are no exception."

"The scale and scope of Donald Trump's fraud is staggering -- and so, too, is his ego and his belief that the rules don't apply to him," she said.

James also heralded Judge Engoron's penalties as effective remedies to "ensure this fraud cannot continue."

Based on Friday's decision, former President Trump and his co-defendants will likely owe $463.9 million based on their initial fine and the prejudgment interest imposed by the court, according to a representative for the New York attorney general.

Trump himself will likely owe $453.5 million, between his $354.86 million fine and $98.6 million in interest.

The amount of interest owed by the defendants is set to increase every day they do not pay the fines.

New York Attorney General Letitia James, whose office brought the civil fraud case against Donald Trump, described the ruling as a "tremendous victory for this state, this nation, and for everyone who believes that we all must play by the same rules -- even former presidents."

“When powerful people cheat to get better loans, it comes at the expense of honest and hardworking people," James said in a statement. "Everyday Americans cannot lie to a bank to get a mortgage to buy a home, and if they did, our government would throw the book at them. There simply cannot be different rules for different people."

The former president is "finally facing accountability for his lying, cheating, and staggering fraud," she said.

In addition to the fines imposed on Donald Trump and his co-defendants, the judge's decision leaves the Trump Organization in a constrained position to continue operating their New York-based businesses.

While Judge Engoron backtracked on his September summary judgment ruling -- vacating the part of his order that canceled their business certificates -- Donald Trump and his sons are temporarily unable to lead their namesake company. Trump faces a three-year ban on serving as the leader of a New York company, and his sons face two-year bans.

An independent monitor will continue to oversee the company's finances for at least three years, and the company needs to install a director of compliance.

Regarding the combined $364 million owed by the defendants, experts who ABC News spoke with believe it is unlikely any of them foot the bill immediately; instead, they can cover the fine with a bond while they appeal.

Judge Arthur Engoron denied Donald Trump's request for a mistrial, describing the defendants' arguments as "nonsensical," "disingenuous," and "utterly without merit."

Engoron rejected the motion without hearing any arguments from the New York Attorney General, who earlier this week requested that an extended briefing be scheduled.

"I cannot sign a proposed order to show cause that is utterly without merit, and upon which subsequent briefing would therefore be futile," Engoron wrote in his ruling.

Across a four-page order, Engoron sharply disagreed with the allegations from the defendants that he was engaging in "co-judging" with his law clerk.

"As I have made clear over the course of this trial, my rulings are mine, and mine alone. There is absolutely no 'co-judging' at play," Engoron said.

Addressing his principal law clerk's political donations, which the judge said she has largely made in order to purchase tickets to functions while pursuing elected judicial office, Engoron called out the defendants for failing to acknowledge the "applicable unambiguous ethical guidelines" that permit such donations. He similarly dismissed the idea that his clerk attending events sponsored by political organizations implies that she supports any position taken by those groups.

"Such arguments are nonsensical; and in any event, they are a red herring, as my Principal Law Clerk does not make rulings or issue orders -- I do," Engoron said in his ruling.

Court was subsequently adjourned for the day.