I think you're approaching this the wrong way.
The expert developers who come for meeting but when they find this is
a new company and there is no other member teams, they give up and
leave, and the main thing they say is "we prefer to work for a famous
company with big teams"
... why would they? You're asking them to not work at a stable company, in exchange for... what? I mean, you said in the comments: "What I offered them was equal to what other famous companies maybe offering them". So you're not offering better pay, but imposing a very very large risk of the job not being around a year later. Does it honestly surprise you that they'd turn your offer down?
"I don't want to hire new grads, because they don't have knowledge in
the technologies I need to use"
New grads often don't have the technologies needed. Heck, I haven't started a job where I have all the technologies needed. Part of being a developer is easily picking up new skills. Did you consider whether every single person you need to hire has to be an expert, or whether a bright fresh grad could pick up a skill or two and serve a purpose for what you're trying to accomplish?
To put it bluntly, you're looking for people with in-demand skills, and asking them to take a huge risk: working for a fledgling startup. Most startups offset this risk by paying quite a bit more or by also offering equity in their company. I wouldn't even call what you're doing a startup at this point - it's just a person with an idea. I'd highly suggest you find a partner (or two) to take this out of the realm of "Eh, this is a cool idea I had" to "The three of us are currently working on the core minimum viable product, but we're going to need additional devs to X, Y, and Z."
Finally, this comment was kinda funny:
I don't like to over pay and do an expensive project when it wasn't
... understood. Problem is, Labor is a market. It doesn't matter what you think 'expensive' is: if you don't offer enough money, you won't get the people to do your project. (The same way that it doesn't matter if someone thinks they're underpaid, if no company is willing to pay their expectant salary.)
EDIT: I had to add something based on this comment:
The problem is I don't want to give equity to my employees. In fact Im
not looking for a co-founder. But I will be glad to hear about other
ideas to offer them?
I really think you're in the wrong mindset here. Let me try to demonstrate it.
Imagine a company saying: "We're looking for an investor. We're willing to sell 10% stake in our company in exchange for $50,000."
It's not like that company wants to lose 10% of their company. It's that, after the sale, they think the 90% remaining will be worth a lot more than the 100% without investment. That the investment will raise their odds of having a successful business - because, at the end of the day, having 100% equity in a failure doesn't mean anything. Likewise, having 100% equity in a $10k/year company is a heck of a lot worse than a 90% equity in a $100k/year company.
Well, that's where you're at. You've got 100% equity in a failure at the moment. Instead of focusing on "I'm losing equity!" - focus on raising the chances of a successful venture. Because equity is just a multiplier on the success of a business, not an absolute measurement in itself.